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 703 records · Page 39
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2002

STS 110 Mission Highlights Resource Tape

A continuation of 'STS 110 Mission Highlights Resource Tape'. This video, Part 3 of 4, shows footage from flight days 6 through 9 of STS-110. The spacecrew includes Michael J. Bloomfield, Commander Stephen N. Frick, Pilot; Jerry L. Ross, Mission Specialist; Steven L. Smith, Mission Specialist; Ellen Ochoa, Mission Specialist; Lee M.E. Morin, Mission Specialist; Rex J. Walheim, Mission Specialist. On flight day 6, Ross and Morin conduct an EVA (extravehicular activity) to secure a tripod like strut to the S0 Truss of the International Space Station (ISS). They also move the drag link and keel pins from one face of the Truss to the other to free the rail on the truss for a railcar to move. Smith installs a camera onto the CANADARM robotic arm on flight day 7, and on flight day 8 the restraints are removed from the railcar connected to the S0 Truss in preparation for checkout. The checkout of the railcar is shown, including its inaugural run. Ross and Morin conduct another EVA on flight day 9 to complete the outfitting of the S0 Truss Structure. Notable footage includes views of Ross and Morin at work from the helmet-mounted camera on Ross' EVA suit, including close-ups of the pistol grip tool, CANADARM 2 onboard the ISS lit at sunrise, a 'diamond ring' effect formed by the Sun between the Earth's limb and the ISS, a brief shot of the Yucatan peninsula, and a end-to-end pan down the length of the ISS. The activities from other flights days can be seen on "STS 110 Mission Highlights Resource Tape" Part 1 of 4 (internal ID 2002137575), "STS 110 Mission Highlights Resource Tape" Part 2 of 4 (internal ID 2002137573), and "STS 110 Mission Highlights Resource Tape" Part 4 of 4 (internal ID 2002137517).

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2002

STS 110 Mission Highlights Resource Tape

A continuation of 'STS 110 Mission Highlights Resource Tape'. This video, Part 2 of 4, shows footage from flight days 3 through 5 of STS-110. The flight crew includes Michael J. Bloomfield, Commander; Stephen N. Frick, Pilot; Jerry L. Ross, Mission Specialist; Steven L. Smith, Mission Specialist; Ellen Ochoa, Mission Specialist; Lee M.E. Morin, Mission Specialist; Rex J. Walheim, Mission Specialist. The coverage from flight day 3 includes docking replays of Atlantis and the International Space Station (ISS), and postdocking procedures, as well as intermingling of the flight crew with the Expedition 4 crew (Yury I. Onufrienko, Commander; Daniel W. Bursch, Flight Engineer; Carl E. Walz, Flight Engineer) of the ISS. Flight day 4 includes an EVA (extravehicular activity) in which Walheim and Smith lift the S0 Truss from the payload bay, and temporarily clamp it onto the Destiny laboratory. On flight day 5 a suite of spaceborne experiments (not shown) arrives at Destiny, including protein crystal growth and wheat plant growth experiments. Notable footage includes Hawaii, New Zealand, and sunrise on Atlantis. An unknown object steaks across the field of view during the video, with the Earth in the background. The activities of the other flight days can be seen on 'STS 110 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 1 of 4' (internal ID 2002137575), 'STS 110 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 3 of 4' (internal ID 2002137574), and 'STS 110 Mission Highlights Resource Tape, Part 4 of 4' (internal ID 2002137517).

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2002

STS 110 Mission Highlights Resource Tape

A continuation of 'STS 110 Mission Highlights Resource Tape'. This video, Part 4 of 4, shows footage from flight days 10 through 12 of STS-110. The spacecrew includes Michael J. Bloomfield, Commander; Stephen N. Frick, Pilot; Jerry L. Ross, Mission Specialist; Steven L. Smith, Mission Specialist; Ellen Ochoa, Mission Specialist; Lee M.E. Morin, Mission Specialist; Rex J. Walheim, Mission Specialist. Flight day 10 includes an exchange of farewells with the Expedition 4 crew (Yury I. Onufrienko, Commander; Daniel W. Bursch, Flight Engineer; Carl E. Walz, Flight Engineer) of the International Space Station (ISS), and undocking. The video includes many views of the ISS as Atlantis departs, including cloud cover and the Earth's limb as backgrounds. There is also a view of Atlantis with its payload bay open. On flight day 11, in preparation for landing, the crew conducts a checkout of flight controls and a test firing. A spaceborne wheat plant experiment onboard the ISS is briefly shown. Flight day 12 includes closing the payload bay, suit-up, and landing. Kennedy Space Center is seen from the air, and the video shows landing replays, as well as a heads-up display view of the landing. Earth views include clear views of Western Sahara, Morocco, Mauritania, and Algeria, with the Atlantic Ocean, a cloud obstructed view of Newfoundland and the Atlantic, Pacific Ocean sun glint, and an excellent view of the Chicago area and Lake Michigan at night. The activities from other flights days can be seen on "STS 110 Mission Highlights Resource Tape" Part 1 of 4 (internal ID 2002137575), "STS 110 Mission Highlights Resource Tape" Part 2 of 4 (internal ID 2002137573), and "STS 110 Mission Highlights Resource Tape" Part 3 of 4 (internal ID 2002137574).

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2004

Radioisotope Electric Propulsion Missions Utilizing a Common Spacecraft Design

A study was conducted that shows how a single Radioisotope Electric Propulsion (REP) spacecraft design could be used for various missions throughout the solar system. This spacecraft design is based on a REP feasibility design from a study performed by NASA Glenn Research Center and the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory. The study also identifies technologies that need development to enable these missions. The mission baseline for the REP feasibility design study is a Trojan asteroid orbiter. This mission sends an REP spacecraft to Jupiter s leading Lagrange point where it would orbit and examine several Trojan asteroids. The spacecraft design from the REP feasibility study would also be applicable to missions to the Centaurs, and through some change of payload configuration, could accommodate a comet sample-return mission. Missions to small bodies throughout the outer solar system are also within reach of this spacecraft design. This set of missions, utilizing the common REP spacecraft design, is examined and required design modifications for specific missions are outlined.

Fiehler, Douglas↗
NASA NTRS2005

Conceptual Design of a Communications Relay Satellite for a Lunar Sample Return Mission

In 2003, NASA solicited proposals for a robotic exploration of the lunar surface. Submissions were requested for a lunar sample return mission from the South Pole-Aitken Basin. The basin is of interest because it is thought to contain some of the oldest accessible rocks on the lunar surface. A mission is under study that will land a spacecraft in the basin, collect a sample of rock fragments, and return the sample to Earth. Because the Aitken Basin is on the far side of the Moon, the lander will require a communications relay satellite (CRS) to maintain contact with the Earth during its surface operation. Design of the CRS's orbit is therefore critical. This paper describes a mission design which includes potential transfer and mission orbits, required changes in velocity, orbital parameters, and mission dates. Several different low lunar polar orbits are examined to compare their availability to the lander versus the distance over which they must communicate. In addition, polar orbits are compared to a halo orbit about the Earth-Moon L2 point, which would permit continuous communication at a cost of increased fuel requirements and longer transmission distances. This thesis also examines some general parameters of the spacecraft systems for the mission under study. Mission requirements for the lander dictate the eventual choice of mission orbit. This mission could be the first step in a period of renewed lunar exploration and eventual human landings.

Brunner, Christopher W.↗
NASA NTRS2006

NASA Systems Analysis and Concepts Directorate Mission and Trade Study Analysis

Mission analysis, as practiced by the NASA Langley Research Center's Systems Analysis and Concepts Directorate (SACD), consists of activities used to define, assess, and evaluate a wide spectrum of aerospace systems for given requirements. The missions for these systems encompass a broad range from aviation to space exploration. The customer, who is usually another NASA organization or another government agency, often predefines the mission. Once a mission is defined, the goals and objectives that the system will need to meet are delineated and quantified. A number of alternative systems are then typically developed and assessed relative to these goals and objectives. This is done in order to determine the most favorable design approaches for further refinement. Trade studies are performed in order to understand the impact of a requirement on each system and to select among competing design options. Items varied in trade studies typically include: design variables or design constraints; technology and subsystem options; and operational approaches. The results of trade studies are often used to refine the mission and system requirements. SACD studies have been integral to the decision processes of many organizations for decades. Many recent examples of SACD mission and trade study analyses illustrate their excellence and influence. The SACD-led, Agency-wide effort to analyze a broad range of future human lunar exploration scenarios for NASA s Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) and the Mars airplane design study in support of the Aerial Regional-scale Environment Survey of Mars (ARES) mission are two such examples. This paper describes SACD's mission and trade study analysis activities in general and presents the lunar exploration and Mars airplane studies as examples of type of work performed by the SACD.

Ricks, Wendell↗
NASA NTRS2007

Integrating Automation into a Multi-Mission Operations Center

NASA Goddard Space Flight Center's Space Science Mission Operations (SSMO) Project is currently tackling the challenge of minimizing ground operations costs for multiple satellites that have surpassed their prime mission phase and are well into extended mission. These missions are being reengineered into a multi-mission operations center built around modern information technologies and a common ground system infrastructure. The effort began with the integration of four SMEX missions into a similar architecture that provides command and control capabilities and demonstrates fleet automation and control concepts as a pathfinder for additional mission integrations. The reengineered ground system, called the Multi-Mission Operations Center (MMOC), is now undergoing a transformation to support other SSMO missions, which include SOHO, Wind, and ACE. This paper presents the automation principles and lessons learned to date for integrating automation into an existing operations environment for multiple satellites.

Surka, Derek M.↗
NASA NTRS2008

The Integrated Medical Model: Statistical Forecasting of Risks to Crew Health and Mission Success

The Integrated Medical Model (IMM) helps capture and use organizational knowledge across the space medicine, training, operations, engineering, and research domains. The IMM uses this domain knowledge in the context of a mission and crew profile to forecast crew health and mission success risks. The IMM is most helpful in comparing the risk of two or more mission profiles, not as a tool for predicting absolute risk. The process of building the IMM adheres to Probability Risk Assessment (PRA) techniques described in NASA Procedural Requirement (NPR) 8705.5, and uses current evidence-based information to establish a defensible position for making decisions that help ensure crew health and mission success. The IMM quantitatively describes the following input parameters: 1) medical conditions and likelihood, 2) mission duration, 3) vehicle environment, 4) crew attributes (e.g. age, sex), 5) crew activities (e.g. EVA's, Lunar excursions), 6) diagnosis and treatment protocols (e.g. medical equipment, consumables pharmaceuticals), and 7) Crew Medical Officer (CMO) training effectiveness. It is worth reiterating that the IMM uses the data sets above as inputs. Many other risk management efforts stop at determining only likelihood. The IMM is unique in that it models not only likelihood, but risk mitigations, as well as subsequent clinical outcomes based on those mitigations. Once the mathematical relationships among the above parameters are established, the IMM uses a Monte Carlo simulation technique (a random sampling of the inputs as described by their statistical distribution) to determine the probable outcomes. Because the IMM is a stochastic model (i.e. the input parameters are represented by various statistical distributions depending on the data type), when the mission is simulated 10-50,000 times with a given set of medical capabilities (risk mitigations), a prediction of the most probable outcomes can be generated. For each mission, the IMM tracks which conditions occurred and decrements the pharmaceuticals and supplies required to diagnose and treat these medical conditions. If supplies are depleted, then the medical condition goes untreated, and crew and mission risk increase. The IMM currently models approximately 30 medical conditions. By the end of FY2008, the IMM will be modeling over 100 medical conditions, approximately 60 of which have been recorded to have occurred during short and long space missions.

Fitts, M. A.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Dual Mission Scenarios for the Human Lunar Campaign - Performance, Cost and Risk Benefits

Scenarios for human lunar operations with capabilities significantly beyond Constellation Program baseline missions are potentially feasible based on the concept of dual, sequential missions utilizing a common crew and a single Ares I/CEV (Crew Exploration Vehicle). For example, scenarios possible within the scope of baseline technology planning include outpost-based sortie missions and dual sortie missions. Top level cost benefits of these dual sortie scenarios may be estimated by comparison to the Constellation Program reference two-mission-per-year lunar campaign. The primary cost benefit is the accomplishment of Mission B with a "single launch solution" since no Ares I launch is required. Cumulative risk to the crew is lowered since crew exposure to launch risks and Earth return risks are reduced versus comparable Constellation Program reference two-mission-per-year scenarios. Payload-to-the-lunar-surface capability is substantially increased in the Mission B sortie as a result of additional propellant available for Lunar Lander #2 descent. This additional propellant is a result of EDS #2 transferring a smaller stack through trans-lunar injection and using remaining propellant to perform a portion of the lunar orbit insertion (LOI) maneuver. This paper describes these dual mission concepts, including cost, risk and performance benefits per lunar sortie site, and provides an initial feasibility assessment.

Saucillo, Rudolph J.↗
NASA NTRS2009

The Integrated Medical Model - Optimizing In-flight Space Medical Systems to Reduce Crew Health Risk and Mission Impacts

The Integrated Medical Model (IMM) is a decision support tool used by medical system planners and designers as they prepare for exploration planning activities of the Constellation program (CxP). IMM provides an evidence-based approach to help optimize the allocation of in-flight medical resources for a specified level of risk within spacecraft operational constraints. Eighty medical conditions and associated resources are represented in IMM. Nine conditions are due to Space Adaptation Syndrome. The IMM helps answer fundamental medical mission planning questions such as What medical conditions can be expected? What type and quantity of medical resources are most likely to be used?", and "What is the probability of crew death or evacuation due to medical events?" For a specified mission and crew profile, the IMM effectively characterizes the sequence of events that could potentially occur should a medical condition happen. The mathematical relationships among mission and crew attributes, medical conditions and incidence data, in-flight medical resources, potential clinical and crew health end states are established to generate end state probabilities. A Monte Carlo computational method is used to determine the probable outcomes and requires up to 25,000 mission trials to reach convergence. For each mission trial, the pharmaceuticals and supplies required to diagnose and treat prevalent medical conditions are tracked and decremented. The uncertainty of patient response to treatment is bounded via a best-case, worst-case, untreated case algorithm. A Crew Health Index (CHI) metric, developed to account for functional impairment due to a medical condition, provides a quantified measure of risk and enables risk comparisons across mission scenarios. The use of historical in-flight medical data, terrestrial surrogate data as appropriate, and space medicine subject matter expertise has enabled the development of a probabilistic, stochastic decision support tool capable of optimizing in-flight medical systems based on crew and mission parameters. This presentation will illustrate how to apply quantitative risk assessment methods to optimize the mass and volume of space-based medical systems for a space flight mission given the level of crew health and mission risk.

Kerstman, Eric↗
NASA NTRS2006

Flora: A Proposed Hyperspectral Mission

In early 2004, one of the authors (Stephen Ungar, NASA GSFC) presented a mission concept called "Spectrasat" at the AVIRIS Workshop in Pasadena, CA. This mission concept grew out of the lessons learned from the Earth Observing-One (EO-1) Hyperion Imaging Spectrometer and was structured to more effectively accomplish the types of studies conducted with Hyperion. The Spectrasat concept represented an evolution of the technologies and operation strategies employed on EO-I. The Spectrasat concept had been preceded by two community-based missions proposed by Susan Ustin, UC Davis and Robert Green, NASA JPL. As a result of community participation, starting at this AVIRIS Workshop, the Spectrasat proposal evolved into the Flora concept which now represents the combined visions of Gregory Asner (Carnegie Institute), Stephen Ungar, Robert Green and Robert Knox, NASA GSFC. Flora is a proposed imaging spectrometer mission, designed to address global carbon cycle science issues. This mission centers on measuring ecological disturbance for purposes of ascertaining changes in global carbon stocks and draws heavily on experience gained through AVIRIS airborne flights and Hyperion space born flights. The observing strategy exploits the improved ability of imaging spectrometers, as compared with multi-spectral observing systems, to identify vegetation functional groups, detect ecosystem response to disturbance and assess the related discovery. Flora will be placed in a sun synchronous orbit, with a 45 meter pixel size, a 90 km swath width and a 31 day repeat cycle. It covers the spectral range from 0.4 to 2.5 micrometers with a spectral sampling interval of 10 nm. These specifications meet the needs of the Flora science team under the leadership of Gregory Asner. Robert Green, has introduced a spectrometer design for Flora which is expected to have a SNR of 600: 1 in the VNIR and 450: 1 in the SWIR. The mission team at NASA GSFC is designing an Intelligent Payload Module (IPM) designed to effectively reduce the volume of data required to be transmitted down to the ground. This paper discusses mission science objectives, describes the mission concept and presents the current status of possible funding opportunities leading to realization of the mission.

Ungar, Stephen↗
NASA NTRS2008

Juno Mission Simulation

The Juno spacecraft is planned to launch in August of 2012 and would arrive at Jupiter four years later. The spacecraft would spend more than one year orbiting the planet and investigating the existence of an ice-rock core; determining the amount of global water and ammonia present in the atmosphere, studying convection and deep- wind profiles in the atmosphere; investigating the origin of the Jovian magnetic field, and exploring the polar magnetosphere. Juno mission management is responsible for mission and navigation design, mission operation planning, and ground-data-system development. In order to ensure successful mission management from initial checkout to final de-orbit, it is critical to share a common vision of the entire mission operation phases with the rest of the project teams. Two major challenges are 1) how to develop a shared vision that can be appreciated by all of the project teams of diverse disciplines and expertise, and 2) how to continuously evolve a shared vision as the project lifecycle progresses from formulation phase to operation phase. The Juno mission simulation team addresses these challenges by developing agile and progressive mission models, operation simulations, and real-time visualization products. This paper presents mission simulation visualization network (MSVN) technology that has enabled a comprehensive mission simulation suite (MSVN-Juno) for the Juno project.

space vehicles↗
NASA NTRS2008

Rapid Cost Assessment of Space Mission Concepts Through Application of Complexity-Based Cost Indices

This slide presentation reviews the development of a rapid cost assessment models for evaluation of exploration missions through the application of complexity based cost indices. In Fall of 2004, NASA began developing 13 documents, known as "strategic roadmaps," intended to outline a strategy for space exploration over the next 30 years. The Third Strategic Roadmap, The Strategic Roadmap for Solar System Exploration, focused on strategy for robotic exploration of the Solar System. Development of the Strategic Roadmap for Solar System Exploration led to the investigation of a large variety of missions. However, the necessity of planning around scientific inquiry and budgetary constraints made it necessary for the roadmap development team to evaluate potential missions not only for scientific return but also cost. Performing detailed cost studies for each of the large number of missions was impractical given the time constraints involved and lack of detailed mission studies; so a method of rapid cost assessment was developed by us to allow preliminary analysis. It has been noted that there is a strong correlation between complexity and cost and schedule of planetary missions. While these correlations were made after missions had been built and flown (successfully or otherwise), it seemed likely that a similar approach could provide at least some relative cost ranking. Cost estimation relationships (CERs) have been developed based on subsystem design choices. These CERs required more detailed information than available, forcing the team to adopt a more high level approach. Costing by analogy has been developed for small satellites, however, planetary exploration missions provide such varying spacecraft requirements that there is a lack of adequately comparable missions that can be used for analogy.

cost estimation↗
NASA NTRS2010

Atrial Fibrillation During an Exploration Class Mission

Background: A long-duration exploration class mission is fraught with numerous medical contingency plans. Herein, we explore the challenges of symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) occurring during an exploration class mission. The actions and resources required to ameliorate the situation, including the availability of appropriate pharmaceuticals, monitoring devices, treatment modalities, and communication protocols will be investigated. Challenges of Atrial Fibrillation during an Exploration Mission: Numerous etiologies are responsible for the initiation of AF. On Earth, we have the time and medical resources to evaluate and determine the causative situation for most cases of AF and initiate therapy accordingly. During a long-duration exploration class mission resources will be severely restricted. How is one to determine if new onset AF is due to recent myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, fluid overload, thyrotoxicosis, cardiac structural abnormalities, or CO poisoning? Which pharmaceutical therapy should be initiated and what potential side effects can be expected? Should anti-coagulation therapy be initiated? How would one monitor the therapeutic treatment of AF in microgravity? What training would medical officers require, and which communication strategies should be developed to enable the best, safest therapeutic options for treatment of AF during a long-duration exploration class mission? Summary: These questions will be investigated with expert opinion on disease elucidation, efficient pharmacology, therapeutic monitoring, telecommunication strategies, and mission cost parameters with emphasis on atrial fibrillation being just one illustration of the tremendous challenges that face a long-duration exploration mission. The limited crew training time, medical hardware, and drugs manifested to deal with such an event predicate that aggressive primary and secondary prevention strategies be developed to protect a multibillion-dollar asset like the International Space Station or a mission to the Moon or Mars. Learning Objectives: The audience will become familiar with the risks and challenges inherent to developing a therapeutic strategy for the treatment of atrial fibrillation during a long-term exploration class mission.

Lipset, Mark A.↗
NASA NTRS2010

Heritage and Advanced Technology Systems Engineering Lessons Learned from NASA Deep Space Missions

In the design and development of complex spacecraft missions, project teams frequently assume the use of advanced technology systems or heritage systems to enable a mission or reduce the overall mission risk and cost. As projects proceed through the development life cycle, increasingly detailed knowledge of the advanced and heritage systems within the spacecraft and mission environment identifies unanticipated technical issues. Resolving these issues often results in cost overruns and schedule impacts. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Discovery & New Frontiers (D&NF) Program Office at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) recently studied cost overruns and schedule delays for 5 missions. The goal was to identify the underlying causes for the overruns and delays, and to develop practical mitigations to assist the D&NF projects in identifying potential risks and controlling the associated impacts to proposed mission costs and schedules. The study found that optimistic hardware/software inheritance and technology readiness assumptions caused cost and schedule growth for four of the five missions studied. The cost and schedule growth was not found to result from technical hurdles requiring significant technology development. The projects institutional inheritance and technology readiness processes appear to adequately assess technology viability and prevent technical issues from impacting the final mission success. However, the processes do not appear to identify critical issues early enough in the design cycle to ensure project schedules and estimated costs address the inherent risks. In general, the overruns were traceable to: an inadequate understanding of the heritage system s behavior within the proposed spacecraft design and mission environment; an insufficient level of development experience with the heritage system; or an inadequate scoping of the system-wide impacts necessary to implement an advanced technology for space flight applications. The paper summarizes the study's lessons learned in more detail and offers suggestions for improving the project's ability to identify and manage the technology and heritage risks inherent in the design solution.

Barley, Bryan↗
NASA NTRS2010

Heritage Systems Engineering Lessons from NASA Deep Space Missions

In the design and development of complex spacecraft missions, project teams frequently assume the use of advanced technology systems or heritage systems to enable a mission or reduce the overall mission risk and cost. As projects proceed through the development life cycle, increasingly detailed knowledge of the advanced and heritage systems within the spacecraft and mission environment identifies unanticipated technical issues. Resolving these issues often results in cost overruns and schedule impacts. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Discovery & New Frontiers (D&NF) Program Office at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) recently studied cost overruns and schedule delays for 5 missions. The goal was to identify the underlying causes for the overruns and delays, and to develop practical mitigations to assist the D&NF projects in identifying potential risks and controlling the associated impacts to proposed mission costs and schedules. The study found that optimistic hardware/software inheritance and technology readiness assumptions caused cost and schedule growth for all five missions studied. The cost and schedule growth was not found to be the result of technical hurdles requiring significant technology development. The projects institutional inheritance and technology readiness processes appear to adequately assess technology viability and prevent technical issues from impacting the final mission success. However, the processes do not appear to identify critical issues early enough in the design cycle to ensure project schedules and estimated costs address the inherent risks. In general, the overruns were traceable to: an inadequate understanding of the heritage system s behavior within the proposed spacecraft design and mission environment; an insufficient level of development experience with the heritage system; or an inadequate scoping of the systemwide impacts necessary to implement an advanced technology for space flight applications. The paper summarizes the study s lessons learned in more detail and offers suggestions for improving the project s ability to identify and manage the technology and heritage risks inherent in the design solution.

Barley, Bryan↗
NASA NTRS2004

Deep Space Mission Applications for NEXT: NASA's Evolutionary Xenon Thruster

NASA's Evolutionary Xenon Thruster (NEXT) is designed to address a need for advanced ion propulsion systems on certain future NASA deep space missions. This paper surveys seven potential missions that have been identified as being able to take advantage of the unique capabilities of NEXT. Two conceptual missions to Titan and Neptune are analyzed, and it is shown that ion thrusters could decrease launch mass and shorten trip time, to Titan compared to chemical propulsion. A potential Mars Sample return mission is described, and compassion made between a chemical mission and a NEXT based mission. Four possible near term applications to New Frontiers and Discovery class missions are described, and comparisons are made to chemical systems or existing NSTAR ion propulsion system performance. The results show that NEXT has potential performance and cost benefits for missions in the Discovery, New Frontiers, and larger mission classes.

low thrust trajectories↗
NASA NTRS2011

Design of Spacecraft Missions to Test Kinetic Impact for Asteroid Deflection

There are currently over 8,000 known near-Earth asteroids (NEAs), and more are being discovered on a continual basis. More than 1,200 of these are classified as Potentially Hazardous Asteroids (PHAs) because their Minimum Orbit Intersection Distance (MOID) with Earth's orbit is <= 0.05 AU and their estimated diameters are >= 150 m. To date, 178 Earth impact structures have been discovered, indicating that our planet has previously been struck with devastating force by NEAs and will be struck again. Such collisions are aperiodic events and can occur at any time. A variety of techniques have been proposed to defend our planet from NEA impacts by deflecting the incoming asteroid. However, none of these techniques have been tested. Unless rigorous testing is conducted to produce reliable asteroid deflection systems, we will be forced to deploy completely untested -- and therefore unreliable -- deflection missions when a sizable asteroid on a collision course with Earth is discovered. Such missions will have a high probability of failure. We propose to address this problem with a campaign of deflection technology test missions deployed to harmless NEAs. The objective of these missions is to safely evaluate and refine the mission concepts and asteroid deflection system designs. Our current research focuses on the kinetic impactor, one of the simplest proposed asteroid deflection techniques in which a spacecraft is sent to collide with an asteroid at high relative velocity. By deploying test missions in the near future, we can characterize the performance of this deflection technique and resolve any problems inherent to its execution before needing to rely upon it during a true emergency. In this paper we present the methodology and results of our survey, including lists of NEAs for which safe and effective kinetic impactor test missions may be conducted within the next decade. Full mission designs are also presented for the NEAs which offer the best mission opportunities.

Hernandez, Sonia↗