Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Missions”

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 469 records · Page 26
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Recent Developments of Thermal Protection Materials to Enable Lower Cost Space Missions

Introduction: Starting with the Commercial Crew Program, a new paradigm has emerged at NASA. Rather than designing rockets and spacecrafts for every mission optimized to achieve science, NASA has begun to use a service-based model and utilizing public-private partnership in developing the vehicles that can bring broader benefits as well as lower the cost for NASA missions. Commercial companies own and operate those vehicles. This allows NASA to not design missions from the bottom up, and has cost, risk, and schedule savings implications. On the other side, the constraints require meeting the requirements in terms of mass, volume, power, etc. By leveraging NASA developed technologies, commercial companies can quickly demonstrate the commercial mission concept, and, through technology transfer, adopt needed technology to address supply chain problems. A downside is that the technology has to be sufficiently mature to be transferred by NASA, which means that it requires significant investment, expertise, and time to develop. Space entities are focused on rapid development with an emphasis on manufacturing and integration innovation with reduced cost and schedule and quick entrance into the market. Thermal Protection Systems (TPS) are mission critical, but their development takes years, and involve access to arc jets or unique test facilities. Therefore, their development is both risky and investment heavy. NASA ARC developed several new TPS materials over the last decade (C-PICA, HEEET, 3MDCP, 3DMAT, ADEPT woven TPS) and brought them to high TPS maturity, making them enablers for commercials space missions from LEO, Lunar Sample Return, Mars, and Venus missions. LEO missions are relevant to future Mars missions due to the comparable entry conditions. External Partners' Missions: C-PICA is a recent improvement on NASA’s heritage PICA lightweight TPS ablator. C-PICA is now considered an enabling technology for New Frontiers and other NASA missions. C-PICA was infused into several missions from external partners. Varda Space Industries’ Winnebago-1 spacecraft successfully returned to Earth from LEO on Feb. 21st, 2024, using a C-PICA heatshield. Inversion Space’s Ray vehicle will test both ARC’s C-PICA and SIRCA TPS materials on a LEO return mission later in 2024. The Kentucky Re-Entry Probe Experiment (KREPE) is another example of a low-cost flight experiment to demonstrate the use of small entry capsules to gather data with three instrumented Kentucky Re-entry and Universal Payload System (KRUPS) capsules. NASA Arc provided C-PICA and Soft-PICA for two of the next KRUPS capsules scheduled to re-enter Earth from the ISS later in 2024. Finally, Rocket Lab’s low-cost mission to Venus, scheduled to launch in December 2024, will search for habitable conditions in Venus’ cloud layer, making use of NASA ARC provided HEEET insulation layer heat shield, and SIRCA backshell TPS materials. Future NASA Missions: NASA’s ability to help commercial missions can lead to future low-cost missions for several reasons: Competition encourages lower cost; technology maturation is now done at an integrated system level; and a common design architecture between commercial and scientific applications requires no specialized engineering design. From an engineering perspective, both of these commercial LEO capsules aforementioned are capable of a Mars entry; the commercial payload mut be replaced with as science payload. Finally, several NASA mission concepts, that could be candidates for future SIMPLEx program calls, such as VATMOS-SR and Nephele, both proposing to target the Venusian atmosphere, would make use of the HEEET insulation layer TPS for part of their heat shield.

TPS materials↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO)

Introduction: NASA is preparing to land the first woman and first person of color on the Moon within the next decade, and ensuring the success of these missions will depend on our preparation on the ground in multiple ground-based lunar environment analogs. To achieve this, NASA has used full mission class analogs, of which NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) is the longest continuously running example. Discussion: NEEMO is NASA’s long-standing undersea high-fidelity spaceflight mission analog. It focuses on exploration science, EVA techniques and tools, and maturing ISS IVA flight hardware and operations concepts. NEEMO crews are composed of groups of US and International Partner (IP) astronauts, engineers and scientists who live, work and explore in a challenging environment analogous to the environment experienced currently on ISS and what is expected for future deep space exploration destinations. NEEMO missions are conducted at Aquarius Reef Base (ARB), which includes a shore base in Tavernier, FL, and the world's only undersea research station, the Aquarius habitat, which is located 5.4 miles (9 kilometers) off Key Largo in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. ARB is owned and operated by Florida International University (FIU). Aquarius was selected due to its remote and extreme location and its ability to provide the unique isolation and risk factors that spaceflight presents. NEEMO missions allow for evaluations of end-to-end EVA and Science exploration concepts of operations with a crew that is in situ in a true extreme environment. They also allow for evaluations of flight hardware and ops tools that are either pondered or destined for ISS or Gateway in the near future. NEEMO missions feature flight-like interactions between the crew and a Mission Control Center (MCC )and Science Team, which in turn allows evaluation of mission and science operations decision making and communications techniques. One reason NEEMO missions are of such high fidelity is that so many of the participants are experienced human space flight end operators. The majority of crewmembers are trained astronauts, and many of the MCC operators have credentials as current or former certified ISS MCC operators (e.g., CapCom, EVA Officer, etc.). Mission products are generated daily by the ground team and are modeled on ISS products (but modified as needed). A planning team manages the constantly evolving mission timelines in response to the ever-changing constraints and opportunities. During NEEMO missions, suited EVA crewmembers (using diving helmets) have clear voice communications with each other, the habitat, and the MCC and Science Team back on shore. Each EVA crewmember also sends helmet cam video to the habitat and MCC and Science Teams. Appropriate communications latencies are inserted for the destination being simulated as well. NEEMO missions are made possible by a broad collaboration of participants. Astronauts from all of the ISS partner agencies are eligible for crew assignment. Often the crew includes a NASA scientist, doctor or engineer with a particular skill to contribute. Sometimes crewmembers come from external entities–generally institutes or universities. Objectives come from a wide variety of sources as well, from within NASA, IPs, government agencies, academia, commercial companies and research institutes. A typical NEEMO mission is a collaboration between at least 5 NASA centers. To date, 23 NEEMO missions have been conducted since 2001, and NEEMO 24 is planned for 2022. Conclusion: NEEMO is a high-fidelity mission analog conducted in an extreme subsea environment. It features experienced end-operators in human spaceflight, from the astronaut crewmembers to key personnel staffing Mission Control. Acknowledgments: The authors wish to thank FIU and NASA’s HEO SEI/Strategic Analysis and Exploration Integration and Science Directorate organizations for the continued support that makes the NEEMO Project possible.

M L Reagan↗
NASA NTRS1998

Science Planning for the TROPIX Mission

The objective of the study grant was to undertake the planning needed to execute meaningful solar electric propulsion missions in the magnetosphere and beyond. The first mission examined was the Transfer Orbit Plasma Investigation Experiment (TROPIX) mission to spiral outward through the magnetosphere. The next mission examined was to the moon and an asteroid. Entitled Diana, it was proposed to NASA in October 1994. Two similar missions were conceived in 1996 entitled CNR for Comet Nucleus Rendezvous and MBAR for Main Belt Asteroid Rendezvous. The latter mission was again proposed in 1998. All four of these missions were unsuccessfully proposed to the NASA Discovery program. Nevertheless we were partially successful in that the Deep Space 1 (DS1) mission was eventually carried out nearly duplicating our CNR mission. Returning to the magnetosphere we studied and proposed to the Medium Class Explorer (MIDEX) program a MidEx mission called TEMPEST, in 1995. This mission included two solar electric spacecraft that spiraled outward in the magnetosphere: one at near 900 inclination and one in the equatorial plane. This mission was not selected for flight. Next we proposed a single SEP vehicle to carry Energetic Neutral Atom (ENA) imagers and inside observations to complement the IMAGE mission providing needed data to properly interpret the IMAGE data. This mission called SESAME was submitted unsuccessfully in 1997. One proposal was successful. A study grant was awarded to examine a four spacecraft solar electric mission, named Global Magnetospheric Dynamics. This study was completed and a report on this mission is attached but events overtook this design and a separate study team was selected to design a classical chemical mission as a Solar Terrestrial Probe. Competing proposals such as through the MIDEX opportunity were expressly forbidden. A bibliography is attached.

Russell, C. T.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Education and Public Outreach and Engagement at NASA's Analog Missions in 2012

Analog missions are integrated, multi-disciplinary activities that test key features of future human space exploration missions in an integrated fashion to gain a deeper understanding of system-level interactions and operations early in conceptual development. These tests often are conducted in remote and extreme environments that are representative in one or more ways to that of future spaceflight destinations. They may also be conducted at NASA facilities, using advanced modeling and human-in-the-loop scenarios. As NASA develops a capability driven framework to transport crew to a variety of space environments, it will use analog missions to gather requirements and develop the technologies necessary to ensure successful exploration beyond low Earth orbit. NASA s Advanced Exploration Systems (AES) Division conducts these high-fidelity integrated tests, including the coordination and execution of a robust education and public outreach (EPO) and engagement program for each mission. Conducting these mission scenarios in unique environments not only provides an opportunity to test the EPO concepts for the particular future-mission scenario, such as the best methods for conducting events with a communication time delay, but it also provides an avenue to deliver NASA s human space exploration key messages. These analogs are extremely exciting to students and the public, and they are performed in such a way that the public can feel like part of the mission. They also provide an opportunity for crew members to obtain training in education and public outreach activities similar to what they would perform in space. The analog EPO team is responsible for the coordination and execution of the events, the overall social media component for each mission, and public affairs events such as media visits and interviews. They also create new and exciting ways to engage the public, manage and create website content, coordinate video footage for missions, and coordinate and integrate each activity into the mission timeline. In 2012, the AES Analog Missions Project performed three distinct missions - NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO), which simulated a mission to an asteroid using an undersea laboratory; In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) Field Test, which simulated a robotic mission to the moon searching and drilling for water; and Research and Technology Studies (RATS) integrated tests, which also simulated a mission to an asteroid. This paper will discuss the education and public engagement that occurred during these missions.

Watkins, Wendy L.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Asteroid Crewed Segment Mission Lean Development

The next generation of human spaceflight missions presents numerous challenges to designers that must be addressed to produce a feasible concept. The specific challenges of designing an exploration mission utilizing the Space Launch System and the Orion spacecraft to carry astronauts beyond earth orbit to explore an asteroid stored in a distant retrograde orbit around the moon will be addressed. Mission designers must carefully balance competing constraints including cost, schedule, risk, and numerous spacecraft performance metrics including launch mass, nominal landed mass, abort landed mass, mission duration, consumable limits and many others. The Asteroid Redirect Crewed Mission will be described along with results from the concurrent mission design trades that led to its formulation. While the trades presented are specific to this mission, the integrated process is applicable to any potential future mission. The following trades were critical in the mission formulation and will be described in detail: 1) crew size, 2) mission duration, 3) trajectory design, 4) docking vs grapple, 5) extravehicular activity tasks, 6) launch mass and integrated vehicle performance, 7) contingency performance, 8) crew consumables including food, clothing, oxygen, nitrogen and water, and 9) mission risk. The additional Orion functionality required to perform the Asteroid Redirect Crewed Mission and how it is incorporated while minimizing cost, schedule and mass impacts will be identified. Existing investments in the NASA technology portfolio were leveraged to provide the added functionality that will be beneficial to future exploration missions. Mission kits are utilized to augment Orion with the necessary functionality without introducing costly new requirements to the mature Orion spacecraft design effort. The Asteroid Redirect Crewed Mission provides an exciting early mission for the Orion and SLS while providing a stepping stone to even more ambitious missions in the future.

Gard, Joe↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Quantifying Medical Risk on a Long Duration Lunar Mission: A Demonstration of NASA’s IMPACT Tradespace Analysis Tool

Background NASA’s human exploration spaceflight missions to the Moon and Mars present unprecedented challenges for in-mission medical care. The distance from Earth will mean increased mission durations, communication delays, limited to no resupply opportunities, and constraints on the medical evacuation of astronauts. Mass, volume, power, and data will be limited while higher demands will be placed on the crew to manage medical care. NASA’s Moon to Mars exploration strategy lays out increasingly complex Artemis missions both in terms of duration and operations. In these more challenging deep space missions, it is important to quantitatively estimate the human medical risk to inform a traditional heuristic approach to medical risk. Prior tools have been developed for missions in low Earth orbit, but a new tool is required to plan for future exploration missions. Methods IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a risk assessment tool developed by NASA to advance exploration mission medical system design by quantitatively estimating mission medical risk. IMPACT v1.0 includes a novel evidence library baselined to exploration environments; an expanded list of 119 medical conditions; the addition of medical resources; and the ability for rapid and iterative analysis. Medical system risk estimates include loss of crew life, consideration of the need for return to definitive care (medical evacuation), and an estimate of crew time affected due to medical conditions. A notional long duration lunar orbit and lunar surface design reference mission (DRM) was chosen with a 4-astronaut crew to represent a sustained exploration Artemis mission. Results/Discussion Overall, IMPACT successfully quantified medical risk and derived an optimized medical system to support crew on a long duration lunar mission. In this DRM, the calculated loss of crew life from a medical event was 0.008 events per mission, risk of potential need for evacuation was 0.30 events per mission, and cumulative crew time affected by medical conditions was 103 days. The medical conditions that most contributed to overall medical risk were decompression sickness, trauma conditions, and respiratory failure. The conditions that had the largest effects on crew performance included musculoskeletal injuries and lunar dust exposure. The IMPACT-generated medical system included resources that target the most common and highest risk conditions. This systematic analysis demonstrates the value of the IMPACT tool in medical system design for human exploration spaceflight missions.

Missions to Mars↗
NASA NTRS2024

Quantifying Medical Risk on a Long Duration Lunar Mission: A Demonstration of NASA’s IMPACT Tradespace Analysis Tool

Background NASA’s human exploration spaceflight missions to the Moon and Mars present unprecedented challenges for in-mission medical care. The distance from Earth will mean increased mission durations, communication delays, limited to no resupply opportunities, and constraints on the medical evacuation of astronauts. Mass, volume, power, and data will be limited while higher demands will be placed on the crew to manage medical care. NASA’s Moon to Mars exploration strategy lays out increasingly complex Artemis missions both in terms of duration and operations. In these more challenging deep space missions, it is important to quantitatively estimate the human medical risk to inform a traditional heuristic approach to medical risk. Prior tools have been developed for missions in low Earth orbit, but a new tool is required to plan for future exploration missions. Methods IMPACT (Informing Mission Planning via Analysis of Complex Tradespaces) is a risk assessment tool developed by NASA to advance exploration mission medical system design by quantitatively estimating mission medical risk. IMPACT v1.0 includes a novel evidence library baselined to exploration environments; an expanded list of 119 medical conditions; the addition of medical resources; and the ability for rapid and iterative analysis. Medical system risk estimates include loss of crew life, consideration of the need for return to definitive care (medical evacuation), and an estimate of crew time affected due to medical conditions. A notional long duration lunar orbit and lunar surface design reference mission (DRM) was chosen with a 4-astronaut crew to represent a sustained exploration Artemis mission. Results/Discussion Overall, IMPACT successfully quantified medical risk and derived an optimized medical system to support crew on a long duration lunar mission. In this DRM, the calculated loss of crew life from a medical event was 0.008 events per mission, risk of potential need for evacuation was 0.30 events per mission, and cumulative crew time affected by medical conditions was 103 days. The medical conditions that most contributed to overall medical risk were decompression sickness, trauma conditions, and respiratory failure. The conditions that had the largest effects on crew performance included musculoskeletal injuries and lunar dust exposure. The IMPACT-generated medical system included resources that target the most common and highest risk conditions. This systematic analysis demonstrates the value of the IMPACT tool in medical system design for human exploration spaceflight missions.

Missions to Mars↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

VALENTInE: A Concept for a New Frontiers Class Long Duration In-Situ Balloon Mission to Venus

Venus and Earth are similar in bulk composition, size, density, and approximate distance from the Sun, yet Venus’s modern-day climate and surface geology is distinctly different [1]. Previous missions to Venus revealed unusual volcanic features, possible continental crust, widespread volcanic plains, a weak magnetic field [2], and insights into the Venusian atmosphere [3,4]. Unfortunately, data from these missions were limited in spatial and temporal resolution and global extent. A future mission to Venus is critical to address fundamental questions surrounding the chemical composition and dynamics of the Venusian atmosphere [5], its geologic history [6,7], its internal structure [8,9], and its habitability throughout time [10,11]. We present the Venus Air and Land Expedition: a Novel Trailblazer for In situ Exploration (VALENTInE) mission to meet this need. VALENTInE is a variable altitude balloon that will passively float in Venus’s atmosphere between 45 and 55 km altitude. VALENTInE will acquire atmospheric data at varying latitudes and longitudes in addition to mapping the surface geomorphology and mineralogy across multiple terrains. Mission Objectives: The VALENTInE mission concept is driven by four main science objectives: 1. Determine whether the driving force of the superrotation of Venus’s atmosphere is caused by horizontal or vertical momentum transport. 2. Determine whether the atmospheric composition and noble gas inventory of the Venusian atmosphere is a product of outgassing from the initial protoplanetary source or if there are significant contributions from exogenic sources. 3. Determine whether the tesserae regions (particularly Aphrodite Terra) are felsic and relatively older than surrounding regions. 4. Determine if there is any evidence of a recent dynamo preserved in the rock record of Venus. Mission Overview: A balloon architecture provides a robust system that can survive long-term in the Venusian environment while taking accurate measurements of the lower cloud deck and surface. Two prior balloon missions to Venus, VEGA 1 and VEGA 2 in 1984, have demonstrated the potential for such planetary exploration; however, these missions were short-lived (46 hr), with limited range (54 km). Our spacecraft concept consists of a battery powered balloon with a gondola and flyby carrier stage (Fig. 1). Our novel design allows for at least 15 days of atmospheric exploration, including multiple ascents and descents in the Venus atmosphere. VALENTInE is baselined to launch in 2032, cruise on solar power for 128 days, enter, descend, and inflate (EDI) into Venus’s atmosphere above Aphrodite Terra, and float in Venus’s atmosphere for a total nominal mission duration of 15 days. The balloon, able to control its altitude by changing its buoyancy, will make one full circumnavigation every 4–8 days and move poleward ~1 o latitude per day; it will be passively directed by the horizontal air currents on Venus. The balloon can only be controlled in the z direction, and the expected latitude range is ±10° from EDI. The balloon itself will be a tracer for atmospheric structures such as zonal winds [5, 12]. During the 15-day operational period, there will be five dips to 45 km for a compositional study of the lower atmosphere and geological and magnetic mapping of the surface. Dips are used to take images and measurements closer to the surface and to obtain in situ vertical atmospheric profiles between 45 and 55 km. Instruments: The VALENTInE instrument payload will allow for extensive study of the geology, atmosphere, and interior of Venus. The instrument suite consists of six instruments. The mission profile for each instrument is shown in Fig. 2. Lower Atmosphere Meteorology Analyzer (LAMA) is an atmospheric structure instrument consisting of a thermometer, barometer, and accelerometer to continuously measure temperature and pressure as a function of altitude, longitude, and latitude. TracE and Noble Gas Investigator (TENGI) is aneutral mass spectrometer used to sample the dense atmosphere. TENGI will operate continuously at 45 km and 55 km and will measure D/H ratios, as well as Ne, Ar, and O isotopic ratios. Kilometer Scale Spectral Imager (KSSI) is amultispectral imager (850-1150 nm) used to resolve surface features on the order of km. Near InfraRed Multispectral Photometer (NIRMP) is an Infrared (IR) photometer used to image the surface through the clouds to characterize mineral assemblages at five different areas of the surface. NIRMP will be operated during dwell. ELevation REConnaissance (ELREC) is a light detection and ranging (LIDAR) instrument used for measuring topography at five different areas of the surface. The ELREC data will be combined with those of NIRMP to determine mineral assemblages and how they correlate to topography. Magnetic Exploration and Interior Detective (MEID) is a magnetometer used to detect any near-surface magnetic anomalies. The magnetometer will continuously operate at all altitudes. Mission Design: The spacecraft’s propulsion system will have a wet mass of 930 kg and will be launched on an Atlas V rocket. The spacecraft will jettison the payload upon arrival in Venus’s atmosphere before decelerating to orbital velocity. Figure 2. Notional power-dip profile while the balloon is on the dayside. Risks and Challenges: Raising and lowering the spacecraft to dip beneath the haze layer require a large amount of energy. This issue was partly compensated by limiting the number of dips over the 15 day prime mission. Power needs for pumping helium are reduced by slowing the descent speed, which consequently increases spatial resolution of in situ measurements between 45 and 55 km. The main limitation for the duration of the mission is the need to carry 15 days’ worth of batteries. The bus experiences external Venusian temperatures ranging from ~27°C at 55 km altitude to ~110°C at 45 km altitude. These high atmospheric temperatures require thermal protection for the bus (instruments, electronics, and flight systems) during its descent, dwell at 45 km, and ascent. The bus is maintained at a mechanically safe temperature range of -10°C to 50°C using white external paint, multi-layer insulation (MLI), mechanical/thermal isolation (e.g. Ti, composites), and ~57 kg of Phase Change Materials (PCM). Images and spectra taken below the haze dominate the available data transmission regardless of the time spent at 45 km. Therefore, less time at the lower altitude mainly reduces the coverage of in situ measurements there. Further, we assumed an unrealistically low-density material for the helium storage tanks on the gondola. However, this issue is partially resolved if we were to jettison 75% of the spent helium storage tanks. After the entry process, the balloon volume remains mostly inflated and storage tanks are required only for reducing balloon volume in dipping to 45 km. This mission was planned against an expected New Frontiers 5 (NF5) cost cap of $1B, as the NF5 call had not yet been released. The mission we describe fits within the predicted cost cap if the flyby carrier stage, responsible for powering the spacecraft during cruise and for relaying in situ measurements back to Earth, can be contributed by another space agency. Acknowledgments: We thank the JPL Planetary Science Summer School, especially A. Nash, J. Scully, K. Mitchell, L. Lowes, and J. Armijo, and our mentors from JPL Team X. Thank you to our review panel for their insightful review. References: [1] Kane, S. et al. (2019) JGR:Ps, 124 , 2015–2028. [2] Phillips, J. L., & Russell, C. T. (1987). JGR: Space Physics , 92 (A3), 2253-2263. [3] Nakamura, M. et al. (2018) Earth Planets Space, 70 (1), 144. [4] Svedhem, H. et al. (2009) JGR:P 114 (E5). [5] Limaye et al. (2009) Decadal Survey White Paper . [6] Ivanov, M. and Head, J. (2011) PSS, 59 (13) , 1559-1600. [7] Smrekar, S. et al. (2018) Space Sci Rev, 214 (5), 88. [8] O’Rourke, J. et al. (2018) EPSL, 502 , 46-56. [9] O’Rourke J. et al. (2019) GRL , (46), 5768–5777 [10] Way, M. et al. (2016) GRL, 43 (16), 8376-8383. [11] Way, M. et al. (2020) JGR:P, 125 (5), e2019JE006276. [12] Preston, R. A. et al. (1986) Science, 231 (4744), 1414-1416.

Mission Concept↗
NASA NTRS1973

Representative Space Shuttle missions and their impact on shuttle design.

Four representative Space Shuttle missions for the 1980's are described: mission 1, a third stage deployment and retrieval mission; mission 2, a combination orbiting element revisit and sortie mission; mission 3, a rapid payload retrieval and return mission; and mission 4, a 30-day earth observation sortie mission. The first three missions are proposed baseline reference missions, and, as such, their mission requirements must be met by the baseline shuttle configuration developed by NASA contractors. Typically, these missions impact the design in terms of such basics as shuttle launch payload capability, payload bay size, performance of the orbital maneuvering system (OMS) and the reaction control system (RCS), the basic 7-day orbital system lifetime, and the thermal protection system for high cross-range entry. To illustrate that vehicle design may be subject to requirements from other mission types as well, mission 4 is included. Each description stresses mission requirements having unique impact on vehicle design.

Young, K. A.↗
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 NTRS2015

Robotic Reconnaissance Missions to Small Bodies and Their Potential Contributions to Human Exploration

Introduction: Robotic reconnaissance missions to small bodies will directly address aspects of NASA's Asteroid Initiative and will contribute to future human exploration. The NASA Asteroid Initiative is comprised of two major components: the Grand Challenge and the Asteroid Mission. The first component, the Grand Challenge, focuses on protecting Earth's population from asteroid impacts by detecting potentially hazardous objects with enough warning time to either prevent them from impacting the planet, or to implement civil defense procedures. The Asteroid Mission involves sending astronauts to study and sample a near- Earth asteroid (NEA) prior to conducting exploration missions of the Martian system, which includes Phobos and Deimos. The science and technical data obtained from robotic precursor missions that investigate the surface and interior physical characteristics of an object will help identify the pertinent physical properties that will maximize operational efficiency and reduce mission risk for both robotic assets and crew operating in close proximity to, or at the surface of, a small body. These data will help fill crucial strategic knowledge gaps (SKGs) concerning asteroid physical characteristics that are relevant for human exploration considerations at similar small body destinations. Small Body Strategic Knowledge Gaps: For the past several years NASA has been interested in identifying the key SKGs related to future human destinations. These SKGs highlight the various unknowns and/or data gaps of targets that the science and engineering communities would like to have filled in prior to committing crews to explore the Solar System. An action team from the Small Bodies Assessment Group (SBAG) was formed specifically to identify the small body SKGs under the direction of the Human Exploration and Operations Missions Directorate (HEOMD), given NASA's recent interest in NEAs and the Martian moons as potential human destinations [1]. The action team organized the SKGs into four broad themes: 1) Identify human mission targets; 2) Understand how to work on and interact with the small body surface; 3) Understand the small body environment and its potential risk/benefit to crew, systems, and operational assets; and 4) Understand the small body resource potential. Each of these themes were then further subdivided into categories to address specific SKG issues. Robotic Precursor Contributions to SKGs: Robotic reconnaissance missions should be able to address specific aspects related to SKG themes 1 through 4. Theme 1 deals with the identification of human mission targets within the NEA population. The current guideline indicates that human missions to fastspinning, tumbling, or binary asteroids may be too risky to conduct successfully from an operational perspective. However, no spacecraft mission has been to any of these types of NEAs before. Theme 2 addresses the concerns about interacting on the small body surface under microgravity conditions, and how the surface and/or sub-surface properties affect or restrict the interaction for human exploration. The combination of remote sensing instruments and in situ payloads will provide good insight into the asteroid's surface and subsurface properties. SKG theme 3 deals with the environment in and around the small body that may present a nuisance or hazard to any assets operating in close proximity. Impact and surface experiments will help address issues related to particle size, particle longevity, internal structure, and the near-surface mechanical stability of the asteroid. Understanding or constraining these physical characteristics are important for mission planning. Theme 4 addresses the resource potential of the small body. This is a particularly important aspect of human exploration since the identification and utilization of resources is a key aspect for deep space mission architectures to the Martian system (i.e., Phobos and Deimos). Conclusions: Robotic reconnaissance of small bodies can provide a wealth of information relevant to the science and planetary defense of NEAs. However, such missions to investigate NEAs can also provide key insights into small body strategic knowledge gaps and contribute to the overall success for human exploration missions to asteroids.

Abell, P. A.↗
NASA NTRS2016

MarCO: Interplanetary Mission Development on a CubeSat Scale

Shortly after JPL’s Interior Exploration using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy and Heat Transport (InSight) mission launches, separates, and commences its cruise phase, two CubeSats will deploy from the launch vehicle’s upper stage and begin independent flight to Mars (Fig. 1). During InSight’s entry, descent, and landing (EDL) sequence, these twin Mars Cube One (MarCO) spacecraft will fly 3,500 km above the Martian surface, recording and relaying InSight UHF radio data to the Deep Space Network (DSN) on Earth1. MarCO is a twin CubeSat mission developed by the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) to accompany the InSight (Interior Exploration using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy and Heat Transport) Mars mission lander. MarCO's primary mission objective is to launch with InSight and independently fly to Mars to serve as a communications relay during InSight's entry, descent, and landing (EDL) phase. MarCO represents a new type of deep space mission: CubeSats at Mars. Building on the development of JPL's first interplanetary CubeSat project, the Interplanetary Nano-Spacecraft Pathfinder in Relevant Environment (INSPIRE), MarCO further refined the approach to hardware, software, and ground architecture development to solve the challenges of quickly building low-budget spacecraft to fly to Mars. The greatest constraint, beyond others typical of CubeSat missions, was time. The duration between MarCO's conception to completion of spacecraft assembly was less than two years - an unprecedented schedule for any planetary mission to date. Through necessity, MarCO has built on previous experience, procedures, systems, and development methodologies, defining a new niche for supporting larger primary missions. The MarCO spacecraft are poised to write a new chapter in deep space exploration. Originally slated to launch and reach Mars in 2016, the InSight mission schedule subsequently slipped to 2018. During the original landing of InSight, Earth would not be in view, and no orbiter around Mars would have been in position to both receive UHF EDL data and simultaneously relay it back to Earth. It was from this obstacle that MarCO was conceived. Regardless of any changes to InSight’s 2018 EDL configuration geometry, MarCO is still expected to fly and serve in the same capacity as originally designed: the first CubeSat mission to Mars. CubeSats have historically been firmly in the domain of universities and small companies. As first conceived, they served as a platform upon which to teach all aspects of the space mission lifecycle. JPL took on this mission type with Interplanetary Nano-Spacecraft Pathfinder in Relevant Environment2 (INSPIRE), moving the concept into a new domain: deep space. Building from the INSPIRE platform and lessons learned, MarCO addressed new challenges in the domain of planetary missions: independent interplanetary flight and navigation, integration with a large-scale mission, long-distance and long-delay communication, short development time, and a small development team. Of these, the greatest constraint was schedule: only 18 months passed from conception of mission concept until delivery of fully assembled and tested flight hardware. Careful selection of mission team, along with extensive use of off-the-shelf equipment, and streamlining automated processes, was essential. This achievement represents the next step in the evolution of CubeSats beyond low-Earth orbit.

Werne, Thomas↗
NASA NTRS2022

Ideas on the NASA Senior Review and Mission Extension Process

Extended mission budgets fund a significant part of our community, particularly young scientists who in a relatively short time are exposed to a broad range of experiences and opportunities available in space science and other STEM fields. In particular, mission-funded science offers a relatively stable funding stream that enables meaningful mentoring efforts and interactions, including apprenticeships ranging from project management, to mission operations, to data processing and analysis, to hardware and software development, to STEM-related education and outreach. It moreover provides professional contacts that fuel diversity in mission leadership and in the science and technical workforce at-large. Last but not least, it sustains the scientific productivity of NASA’s missions, which constitute major national investments meriting their full exploitation. Budgets cuts, however, are exercising pressure on the science and operations of the extended mission fleet despite being only a small portion of the overall Division budget. The history of Heliophysics has demonstrated that maintaining the operation of missions beyond their prime phase invariably leads to a much deeper knowledge of the original mission science goals, together with new applications often not foreseen during their original design. Their operation as part of the Heliophysics System Observatory (HSO)---a coordinated, 1eliophysics, multipoint observing system of the heliosphere, is a prime example. Some of the first activities undertaken by the Parker Solar Probe and Solar Orbiter missions required recreating the larger context of their new observations by using the diversity of HSO mission capabilities. The marginal cost of maintaining this valuable, working science resource, in the form of both continuing high quality data access and expertise, is small compared to the cost of the original missions or of new missions to achieve similar objectives, making the operation of extended missions, the best “science per dollar” investment in Heliophysics. We argue that reducing both extended mission operations and science budgets will have a ripple effect across the community, including reducing employment and training opportunities for young scientists, to lowering the quality/impact of the Heliophysics Systems Observatory. Instead, we suggest that the proposal process for mission extension should be re-examined. We offer several ideas for reducing costs of extended missions toward maintaining science output and streamlining the management process.

A. Vourlidas↗
NASA NTRS2022

Recommendations on the Use of Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) Parts for NASA Missions - Phase II

This assessment had two Phases. Phase I captured NASA Centers’ current practices for commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) Electrical, Electronic, and Electromechanical (EEE) parts 1 used in spaceflight systems and ground support equipment (available at https://ntrs.nasa.gov/citations/20205011579) [ref. 1]. The Phase II report provides guidance for selecting and using COTS parts in NASA missions. The approaches proposed in this report differ from current agency practices. This top-level executive summary touches on these new approaches for using COTS parts but does not provide the detailed information that is critical in understanding the rationale behind these new approaches. Readers will need to read the entire report to gain full understanding and effectively use the recommendations herein. NASA’s historical approach to selecting and applying parts has been to define certain parts, primarily specific classes of military specification (MIL-SPEC) parts, as “standard”, leaving all others, including COTS parts, as nonstandard. Standard parts typically are used without further testing (“use-as-is”). Nonstandard parts are subjected to initial screening and subsequent lot acceptance testing of representative samples from each procured lot per MIL-SPEC or similar requirements. Decades later, top-tier commercial part manufacturers have evolved significant manufacturing, statistical control, and technological improvements that can now provide parts as reliable or more reliable than MIL-SPEC parts, when used within their datasheet limits. Concurrently, the space science and exploration community’s needs demand technological advances unavailable with MIL-SPEC parts. This ongoing change necessitates using COTS parts for space missions. Properly selected COTS parts in appropriate applications can offer performance and supply availability advantages compared to MIL-SPEC parts. Their utility and demonstrated reliability result from large volumes and automated production and testing processes. However, careful review and a thorough understanding of their specifications (i.e., datasheet limitations) is needed, and verifying that manufacturer specifications and reliability meet space hardware application needs are necessary. This report recommends MIL-SPEC screening and non-radiation-related lot acceptance testing be reduced or eliminated in cases where evidence of sufficient quality and reliability exists for COTS parts. The extent of NASA's insight into COTS manufacturers and the amount and nature of the needed evidence will differ by mission and will likely be driven by a mission's resources and associated risk posture. To facilitate this goal, two new terminologies have been defined and described: “Industry Leading Parts Manufacturer (ILPM)” and “Established COTS parts.” An ILPM is a COTS manufacturer that produces high quality and reliable parts. Some parts produced by ILPMs, defined as Established COTS parts, do not need any additional MIL-SPEC or NASA screening and lot acceptance testing to be used in space applications. This report provides guidance for selecting, procuring, and applying COTS parts and for performing part-, board-, and system-level COTS parts verification. The recommendation to select Established COTS parts from ILPMs will assure those COTS parts will have comparable quality to corresponding MIL-SPEC parts. Selecting, applying, and verifying Established COTS parts from ILPMs requires a holistic team approach, engaging parts engineers, circuit designers, quality, reliability, and systems engineers, procurement specialists, radiation specialists, avionics leads, and program/project managers. A mission-specific approach tailored to a project’s Mission, Environment, Applications and Lifetime (MEAL) [ref. 2] requirements should be developed and approved by program/project managers. Any associated risks should be clearly identified, quantified, mitigated, and/or accepted. Different approaches are recommended according to program/project Risk Classes A, B, C, and D [ref. 3] and human-rated missions [ref. 4]: 1. Recommend Classes A and B and human-rated missions consider a “MIL-SPEC parts- based design” approach. ”MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach is one in which most parts are MIL-SPEC parts and Established COTS parts from ILPMs are used only when an equivalent MIL-SPEC part does not meet functional or size, weight, and power (SWaP) or performance requirements, or is not available. 2. Recommend Classes D and Sub-D missions consider a “System of COTS” approach. “System of COTS” approach is one which most parts are Established COTS parts from ILPMs. 3. Recommend Class C missions determine which approach is the best for their projects; that is, use either a “MIL-SPEC parts-based design” approach, “System of COTS” approach, or a combined approach utilizing elements of both. This report intends to provide guidance in using COTS parts for NASA missions with risk classifications of A through D and human-rated missions; but it does not address the costs of using COTS parts. Costs of using COTS parts in different NASA mission classes can vary significantly even if the same parts are used in different risk postures, due to differing verification levels needed. The guidance does not distinguish between critical or non-critical systems, and a given project will need to apply the appropriate guidance based on their risk posture. The intended audience of this report are NASA personnel and commercial practitioners who support NASA’s spaceflight missions, including spaceflight program or project managers, parts engineers, parts manufacturers, radiation engineers, avionics engineers, system engineers, circuit design engineers, reliability engineers, safety and mission assurance (SMA) personnel, and parts procurement specialists. The NEPP Program will perform a pathfinder study to explore implementing the guidance in this NESC report. An ILPM verification process is not the same as conventional vendor qualification processes performed according to military standards and specifications. This NESC report intends to provide guidance in utilizing available parts data from ILPM manufacturers for parts assurance assessments needed for NASA missions. The report also captured the current practices from DoD and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in Section 10. Note each DoD and FAA report was provided by the corresponding agencies regarding their practices, which are independent from the NESC recommendations in the report.

Commercial-Off-The-Shelf↗
NASA NTRS1994

Shared mission operations concept

Historically, new JPL flight projects have developed a Mission Operations System (MOS) as unique as their spacecraft, and have utilized a mission-dedicated staff to monitor and control the spacecraft through the MOS. NASA budgetary pressures to reduce mission operations costs have led to the development and reliance on multimission ground system capabilities. The use of these multimission capabilities has not eliminated an ongoing requirement for a nucleus of personnel familiar with a given spacecraft and its mission to perform mission-dedicated operations. The high cost of skilled personnel required to support projects with diverse mission objectives has the potential for significant reduction through shared mission operations among mission-compatible projects. Shared mission operations are feasible if: (1) the missions do not conflict with one another in terms of peak activity periods, (2) a unique MOS is not required, and (3) there is sufficient similarity in the mission profiles so that greatly different skills would not be required to support each mission. This paper will further develop this shared mission operations concept. We will illustrate how a Discovery-class mission would enter a 'partner' relationship with the Voyager Project, and can minimize MOS development and operations costs by early and careful consideration of mission operations requirements.

Spradlin, Gary L.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Next Gen NEAR: Near Earth Asteroid Human Robotic Precursor Mission Concept

Asteroids have long held the attention of the planetary science community. In particular, asteroids that evolve into orbits near that of Earth, called near-Earth objects (NEO), are of high interest as potential targets for exploration due to the relative ease (in terms of delta V) to reach them. NASA's Flexible Path calls for missions and experiments to be conducted as intermediate steps towards the eventual goal of human exploration of Mars; piloted missions to NEOs are such example. A human NEO mission is a valuable exploratory step beyond the Earth-Moon system enhancing capabilities that surpass our current experience, while also developing infrastructure for future mars exploration capabilities. To prepare for a human rendezvous with an NEO, NASA is interested in pursuing a responsible program of robotic NEO precursor missions. Next Gen NEAR is such a mission, building on the NEAR Shoemaker mission experience at the JHU/APL Space Department, to provide an affordable, low risk solution with quick data return. Next Gen NEAR proposes to make measurements needed for human exploration to asteroids: to demonstrate proximity operations, to quantify hazards for human exploration and to characterize an environment at a near-Earth asteroid representative of those that may be future human destinations. The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory has demonstrated exploration-driven mission feasibility by developing a versatile spacecraft design concept using conventional technologies that satisfies a set of science, exploration and mission objectives defined by a concept development team in the summer of 2010. We will describe the mission concept and spacecraft architecture in detail. Configuration options were compared with the mission goals and objectives in order to select the spacecraft design concept that provides the lowest cost, lowest implementation risk, simplest operation and the most benefit for the mission implementation. The Next Gen NEAR spacecraft was designed to support rendezvous with a range of candidate asteroid targets and could easily be launched with one of several NASA launch vehicles. The Falcon 9 launch vehicle supports a Next Gen NEAR launch to target many near-Earth asteroids under consideration that could be reached with a C3 of 18 km2/sec2 or less, and the Atlas V-401 provides added capability supporting launch to NEAs that require more lift capacity while at the same time providing such excess lift capability that another payload of opportunity could be launch in conjunction with Next Gen NEAR. Next Gen NEAR will measure and interact with the target surface in ways never undertaken at an asteroid, and will prepare for first human precursor mission by demonstrating exploration science operations at an accessible NEO. This flexible mission and spacecraft design concept supports target selection based on upcoming Earth-based observations and also provides opportunities for co-manifest & international partnerships. JHU/APL has demonstrated low cost, low risk, high impact missions and this mission will help to prepare NASA for human NEO exploration by combining the best of NASA s human and robotic exploration capabilities.

Rivkin, Andrew S.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Mars Sample Return Using Commercial Capabilities: Mission Architecture Overview

Mars Sample Return (MSR) is the highest priority science mission for the next decade as recommended by the recent Decadal Survey of Planetary Science. This paper presents an overview of a feasibility study for a MSR mission. The objective of the study was to determine whether emerging commercial capabilities can be used to reduce the number of mission systems and launches required to return the samples, with the goal of reducing mission cost. The major element required for the MSR mission are described and include an integration of the emerging commercial capabilities with small spacecraft design techniques; new utilizations of traditional aerospace technologies; and recent technological developments. We report the feasibility of a complete and closed MSR mission design using the following scenario that covers three synodic launch opportunities, beginning with the 2022 opportunity: A Falcon Heavy injects a SpaceX Red Dragon capsule and trunk onto a Trans Mars Injection (TMI) trajectory. The capsule is modified to carry all the hardware needed to return samples collected on Mars including a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV); an Earth Return Vehicle (ERV); and hardware to transfer a sample collected in a previously landed rover mission to the ERV. The Red Dragon descends to land on the surface of Mars using Supersonic Retro Propulsion (SRP). After previously collected samples are transferred to the ERV, the single-stage MAV launches the ERV from the surface of Mars to a Mars phasing orbit. The MAV uses a storable liquid, pump fed bi-propellant propulsion system. After a brief phasing period, the ERV, which also uses a storable bi-propellant system, performs a Trans Earth Injection (TEI) burn. Once near Earth the ERV performs Earth and lunar swing-bys and is placed into a Lunar Trailing Orbit (LTO0 - an Earth orbit, at lunar distance. A later mission, using a Dragon and launched by a Falcon Heavy, performs a rendezvous with the ERV in the lunar trailing orbit, retrieves the sample container and breaks the chain of contact with Mars by transferring the sample into a sterile and secure container. With the sample contained, the retrieving spacecraft, makes a controlled Earth re-entry preventing any unintended release of pristine Martian materials into the Earth's biosphere. Other capsule type vehicles and associated launchers may be applicable. The analysis methods employed standard and specialized aerospace engineering tools. Mission system elements were analyzed with either direct techniques or by using parametric mass estimating relationships (MERs). The architecture was iterated until overall mission convergence was achieved on at least one path. Subsystems analyzed in this study include support structures, power system, nose fairing, thermal insulation, actuation devices, MAV exhaust venting, and GN&C. Best practice application of loads, mass growth contingencies, and resource margins were used. For Falcon Heavy capabilities and Dragon subsystems we utilized publically available data from SpaceX; published analyses from other sources; as well as our own engineering and aerodynamic estimates. Earth Launch mass is under 11 mt, which is within the estimated capability of a Falcon Heavy, with margin. Total entry masses between 7 and 10 mt were considered with closure occurring between 9 and 10 mt. Propellant mass fractions for each major phase of the EDL - Entry, Terminal Descent, and Hazard Avoidance - have been derived. An assessment of the entry conditions on the thermal protection system (TPS), currently in use for Dragon missions, has been made. And shows no significant stressors. A useful mass of 2.0 mt is provided and includes mass growth allowances for the MAV, the ERV, and mission unique equipment. We also report on alternate propellant options for the MAV and options for the ERV, including propulsion systems; crewed versus robotic retrieval mission; as well as direct Earth entry. International Planetary Protection Policies as well as verifiable means of compliance will have a large impact on any MSR mission design. We identify areas within our architecture where such impacts occur. This work shows that emerging commercial capabilities can be used to effectively integrated into a mission to achieve an important planetary science objective.

Mars Sample Return↗
NASA NTRS2008

Preparing Cassini Uplink Operations for Extended Mission

The Cassini-Huygens Mission to Saturn and Titan, a joint venture between the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the European Space Agency, and the Italian Space Agency, is conducting a four-year, prime mission exploring the Saturnian system, including its atmosphere, rings, magnetosphere, moons and icy satellites. Launched in 1997, Cassini began its prime mission in 2004. Cassini is now preparing for a new era, a two-year extended mission to revisit many of the highlights and new discoveries made during the prime mission. Because of the light time delay from Earth to Saturn, and the time needed to coordinate the complicated science and engineering activities that take place on the spacecraft, commanding on Cassini is done in approximately 40-day intervals known as sequences. The Cassini Uplink Operations team is responsible for the final development and validation of the pointing profile and instrument and spacecraft commands that are contained in a sequence. During this final analysis prior to uplink to the spacecraft, thorough and exact evaluation is necessary to ensure there are no mistakes during commanding. In order to perform this evaluation, complete and refined processes and procedures are fundamental. The Uplink Operations team is also responsible for anomaly response during sequence execution, a process in which critical decisions often are made in real-time. Recent anomalies on other spacecraft missions have highlighted two major risks in the operations process: (1) personnel turnover and the retirement of critical knowledge and (2) aging, outdated operations procedures. If other missions are a good barometer, the Cassini extended mission will be presented with a high personnel turnover of the Cassini flight team, which could lead to a loss of expertise that has been essential to the success of the prime mission. In order to prepare the Cassini Uplink Operations Team for this possibility and to continue to develop and operate safe science and engineering sequences, a review and major update of the current documentation and operations procedures was needed. This paper will address the changes made to extended mission sequence generation processes primarily due to new restrictions in spacecraft operating capability and lessons learned from prime mission. In addition, it will address the state of the prime mission operations procedures, the philosophy changes and updates that were made to those procedures in response to process improvement, and the validation of those new procedures through the training of current and new personnel. And lastly, it will address the lessons learned throughout prime mission and how the Uplink Operations team chose to incorporate those lessons into the working documentation and team knowledge. This incorporation was necessary to facilitate the success of the extended mission with potentially all new personnel at some point prior to the end of the mission.

Maxwell, Jennifer L.↗