Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “negotiation”

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 91 records · Page 5
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1997

Multiple Hub Network Choice in the Liberalized European Market

A key question that so far has received relatively little attention in the germane literature is that of the changes at various airports as a result of the EU liberalization policies. That is, presently, most major European airports still benefit from the so-called home-carrier phenomenon where the country's publicly or semi-publicly owned carrier uses the country's main airport as its gateway hub and, consequently, the home-carrier is also the principal user of this airport (in terms of proportion of total aircraft movements, number of passengers transported, connections, slots ownership, etc.). The country's main airport has substantially benefited from these monopoly conditions of airline captivity, strongly determined by the bilateral system of international air transport regulation. Therefore, European major airports were used to operate in essentially different markets, compared to the increasingly competitive markets of their home based carriers. This partly explains relative stability of transport volumes and financial results of European major airports compared to the relatively volatile financial results of most European national airlines. However, the liberalization of European aviation is likely to change this situation. Market access is open now to all community carriers, i.e. carriers with majority ownership and effective control in the hands of EU citizens. Ticket prices are free, governments can only intervene in case of dumping or excessive pricing. A community airline can choose its seat in any of the 15 member states. Licensing procedures are harmonized between member states. In the last few months community carriers have had unrestricted route access within the EU. Most probably this development will be extended to countries inside and outside Europe. Last year the European Commission got the mandate to start negotiations with 10 other European countries. In the meantime the EC has also started negotiations with the USA on so-called soft rights. In the meantime, open skies agreements have been concluded between the USA and most of the EU member states to facilitate strategic alliances between airlines of the states involved. As a result of this on-going liberalization the model of the single 'national' carrier using the national home base as its single hub for the designated third, fourth and sixth freedom operations will stepwise disappear. Within the EU the concept of the national carrier has already been replaced by that of the community carrier. State ownership in more and more European carriers is reduced. On the longer run mergers or even bankruptcy will further undermine the "single national carrier - single national hub" model in Europe. In the meantime, strategic alliances between national carriers in Europe will already reduce the airlines' loyalty to a single airport. Profit maximization and accountability to share holders will supersede the loyalty of these newly emerging alliances, probably looking for the opportunities of a multiple hub network to adequately cover the whole European market. As a consequence, some European airports might see a substantial decline in arriving, departing and transfer traffic, thus in revenues and financial solvency, as well as in their connection to other inter-continental and intra-European destinations. At the same time, other airports might realize a significant increase in traffic as they will be sought after by the profit maximizing airlines as their major gateway hubs. Which will be the losing airports and which will be the winning ones? Can airports anticipate the actions of airlines in deregulated markets and utilize policies which will improve their relative position? If so, what should be these anticipatory policies? These questions become the more urgent, since an increasing number of major European airports will be privatized in the near future. Although increasing airport congestion in Europe will also be reflected in a growing demand pressure for airport slots, this is not a guarantee for a stable transport volume growth of individual airports. The more volatile the market is, the more vulnerable privatized airports become. Therefore, the main issue of this study is the analysis of the opportunities of major European airports to become a central hub as a result of the network choices made by the new European airlines in a completely liberalized market. In a previous study (Berechman and de Wit, 1996), we already explored the potential of Amsterdam Airport Schiphol of becoming the major West-European hub, once European aviation markets are deregulated. A major hindrance of that study was the use of a single hub-and-spoke network. For example that model could not analyze the viability of different combinations of European hubs within a multiple hub network of alternative airline alliances. In this study, we have formulated the model of a multi-hub network where two West-European airports are used for inter-continental and intra-European travel to enable a more realistic analysis of hub choice. Like the previous one also this multi-hub model is primarily used to assess the potential ability of Amsterdam Airport Schiphol for becoming a major West-European hub. Thus, in particular, the policy tests focus on this airport in a double hub network.

Berechman, Joseph↗
NASA NTRS1998

Monographs in Aerospace History Series No. 11. Together in Orbit: The Origins of International Participation in the Space Station

This essay is a history and analysis of the steps leading to the origins of the space station partnership between the United States and its closest allies. It traces the process that led to the decision to invite other countries to participate in the project and their reasons for accepting that invitation. Not covered in this account are the difficult negotiations during the 1984-1988 period that led first to an initial set of agreements that allowed the prospective partners to work together during the early stages of the space station program and then to the final set of agreements creating the original space station partnership. Also, the 1993 invitation to the Russian Federation to join the original partners is not discussed, nor are the subsequent negotiations to revise the 1988 agreements.

Logsdon, John M.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Bargaining for Open Skies

In this paper we analyze the bargaining problem between countries when negotiating bilateral air service agreements. To do so, we use the methods of bargaining and game theory. We give special attention to the case where a liberal minded country is trying to convince a less liberal country to agree to bilateral open skies, and the liberal country might also unilaterally open up its market. The following analysis is positive in the sense that the results help explain and predict the outcome of negotiations under different payoffs and structures of the bargaining process. They are normative in the sense that adequate manipulation of the bargaining conditions can ensure a desired outcome.

Wojahn, Oliver W.↗
NASA NTRS2001

National Environmental Change Information System Case Study

The Global Hydrology and Climate Center and NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center conducted a fact-finding case study for the Data Management Working Group (DMWG), now referred to as the Data and Information Working Group (DIWG), of the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) to determine the feasibility of an interagency National Environmental Change Information System (NECIS). In order to better understand the data and information needs of policy and decision makers at the national, state, and local level, the DIWG asked the case study team to choose a regional water resources issue in the southeastern United States that had an impact on a diverse group of stakeholders. The southeastern United States was also of interest because the region experiences interannual climatic variations and impacts due to El Nino and La Nina. Jointly, with input from the DIWG, a focus on future water resources planning in the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) River basins of Alabama, Georgia, and Florida was selected. A tristate compact and water allocation formula is currently being negotiated between the states and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE) that will affect the availability of water among competing uses within the ACF River basin. All major reservoirs on the ACF are federally owned and operated by the U.S. Army COE. A similar two-state negotiation is ongoing that addresses the water allocations in the adjacent Alabama-Coosa-Tallapoosa (ACT) River basin, which extends from northwest Georgia to Mobile Bay. The ACF and ACT basins are the subject of a comprehensive river basin study involving many stakeholders. The key objectives of this case study were to identify specific data and information needs of key stakeholders in the ACF region, determine what capabilities are needed to provide the most practical response to these user requests, and to identify any limitations in the use of federal data and information. The NECIS case study followed the terms of reference developed by the interagency DIWG. The case study "lessons learned" and "key findings" offer guidelines and considerations to the DMWG for the development and implementation of a NECIS that would support the data and information needs of policy and decision makers at the national, state, and local level.

Goodman, S. J.↗
NASA NTRS1997

Free Flight and Self-Separation from the Flight Deck Perspective

The concept of "free flight", while still being developed, is intended to emphasize more, flexibility for operators in the National Airspace System (NAS) by providing more separation responsibility to pilots, New technologies, procedures, and concepts have been suggested by the aviation community to enable this task; however, much work needs to be accomplished to help define and evaluate the concept feasibility. The purpose of this simulation was to begin examining some of the communication and procedural issues associated with self-separation in the enroute environment. A simulation demonstration was conducted in the Boeing 747-400 simulator at NASA Ames Research Center. Commercial pilots (from a U.S. domestic carrier) current on the B747-400 aircraft were the participants. Ten flight crews (10 captains, 10 first officers) flew in the Denver enroute airspace environment. A new alerting logic designed to allow for airborne self-separation was created for this demonstration. This logic assumes automatic dependent surveillance broadcast (ADS-B) capability and represented aircraft up to 120 nautical miles on the display. The new flight deck display features were designed and incorporated on the existing navigational display in the simulator to allow for increased traffic and maneuvering information to the flight crew. New tools were also provided to allow the crews to assess conflicts and potential maneuvers before implementing them. Each of the flight crews flew eight different scenarios in the Denver enroute airspace. The scenarios included eight to ten other aircraft, and each scenario was created with the intent of having one of the other aircraft become an operational conflict for our simulator aircraft. Different types of conflict geometries were represented across the eight scenarios. Also, some scenarios allowed for more time to detect a potential clearance, while others allowed for less time for'detection. Additionally, the crews were asked to a ply the Visual Flight Rules (VFR) right of way rules when determining who should maneuver in a conflict situation; therefore, the scenarios were designed to test different applications of those recommendations, Data analyses include an evaluation of crew procedures and communication. The application of the VFR right-of-way rules are being explored. Timing variables are being examined to determine potential efficiency differences between scenarios and conflict types. Proximity of aircraft will be assessed as one indication of the operational safety. The intent of these evaluations is to help provide definitions and guidelines of negotiation procedures in a self-separation environment assuming automated data link technology (ADS-B). Also, definitions of likely flight crew maneuvers and application to current VFR right-of-way rules may be obtained, along with guidelines for negotiation procedures between flight crews.

Lozito, Sandra↗
NASA NTRS1998

Rovers for Mars Polar Exploration

Mobility is a generic capability needed for Mars exploration. Requirements for mobility range from those to get observations of individual rocks all the way to getting high resolution observations of regional areas. Table 1 shows the required-range of mobility to achieve various tasks. The Pathfinder mission and field experiments simulating rover missions [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] provide guidance as to rover capabilities that can reasonably be expected in the next decade. Rover mobility can be accomplished in a variety of ways, the most common being wheels or tracks and legged-walkers. Wheeled vehicles can traverse over rocks smaller than 1/2 wheel diameter, and with path planning to avoid larger rocks, can traverse terrains comparable to those seen on Mars in the Viking and Pathfinder landing sites. Slopes of 45 deg can be easily negotiated by wheeled rovers. Walking vehicles can negotiate even more complex terrain but requires computation capability to select each leg placement. Extremely complex terrain was traversed by the Nomad II walker which descended into (and most of the way out of) an active volcanic caldera (Mount Spur, AK) in 1995, although a slope failure eventually resulted in broken legs. The traverse range of a rover is limited by its science objectives, performance capabilities, and operational lifetime. The speed of rover traverse is a relative minor factor. With a different communication system, and no stops for science experiments, Sojourner could probably have traveled a kilometer. But, achieving land speed records is not a major objective of a science mission. Achieving science objectives requires targeting particular objects and studying them in detail, and the associated operational requirements will likely limit rover traverse range significantly. Traversing from target to target requires relatively few command cycles provided the traverse is over a short enough distance that it can be adequately planned. An operational goal of 100 m traverse per command cycle, arriving at a predetermined target, seems achievable. Investigating science targets requiring manipulator or instrument placement and sample collection will likely take several command cycles per target. Mission simulations [6] have demonstrated that traverse dI stances of 100-300 m, with detailed investigation of 5-10 targets take 50-100 command cycles, not unlike the Pathfinder experience in spite of the use of larger, faster, more capable rovers. Significant advances in rover autonomy will be needed to improve this Situation and it is not clear how much improvement will be brought to flight programs in the next decade. Dust accumulation on solar panels degrades power over time and, without dust removal, rover operational lifetimes may be limited to 90 sols.

Stoker, Carol↗
NASA NTRS2002

Simplify and Succeed

In the early 70's the management at the American Stock Exchange wanted a set of automated displays installed on the trading floor. The purpose of the displays was to announce to the public all changes related to the trading of equities. I had exactly three months to get the work done. Because of local building codes, I was told that the displays that met the specifications would not be available until nine months after the order was placed. This was not acceptable to the Exchange's management. The project team was in a quandary. I called a meeting to discuss the situation and develop a report explaining why we needed more time. Jokingly, I suggested, 'Why not use picket signs?' The Exchange had just gone through some painful labor negotiations. To anyone who had been involved in those negotiations, the thought of a picket sign should have sounded, I thought, like gallows humor. This was not acceptable to the Exchange's management. To my surprise, the rest of the project team took the idea seriously.

Levine, Art↗
NASA NTRS2002

The Mars Exploration Rover/Collaborative Information Portal

Astrology has long argued that the alignment of the planets governs human affairs. Science usually scoffs at this. There is, however, an important exception: sending spacecraft for planetary exploration. In late May and early June, 2003, Mars will be in position for Earth launch. Two Mars Exploration Rovers (MER) will rocket towards the red planet. The rovers will perform a series of geological and meteorological experiments, seeking to examine geological evidence for water and conditions once favorable for life. Back on earth, a small army of surface operations staff will work to keep the rovers running, sending directions for each day's operations and receiving the files encoding the outputs of the Rover's six instruments. (Mars is twenty light minutes from Earth. The rovers must be robots.) The fundamental purpose of the project is, after all, Science. Scientists have experiments they want to run. Ideally, scientists want to be immediately notified when the data products of their experiments have been received, so that they can examine their data and (collaboratively) deduce results. Mars is an unpredictable environment. We may issue commands to the rovers but there is considerable uncertainty in how the commands will be executed and whether what the rovers sense will be worthy of further pursuit. The steps of what is, to a scientist, conceptually an individual experiment may be scattered over a large number of activities. While the scientific staff has an overall strategic idea of what it would like to accomplish, activities are planned daily. The data and surprises of the previous day need to be integrated into the negotiations for the next day's activities, all synchronized to a schedule of transmission windows . Negotiations is the operative term, as different scientists want the resources to run possibly incompatible experiments. Many meetings plan each day's activities.

Walton, Joan↗
NASA NTRS2004

Argumentation for coordinating shared activities

an increasing need for space missions to be able to collaboratively (and competitively) develop plans both within and across missions. In addition, interacting spacecraft that interleave onboard planning and execution must reach consensus on their commitments to each other prior to execution. In domains where missions have varying degrees of interaction and different constraints on communication and computation, the missions will require different coordination protocols in order to efficiently reach consensus with in their imposed deadlines. We describe a Shared Activity Coordination (SHAC) framework that provides a decentralized algorithm for negotiating the scheduling of shared activities over the lifetimes of multiple agents and a foundation for customizing protocols for negotiating planner interactions. We investigate variations of a few simple protocols based on argumentation and distributed constraints satisfaction techniques and evaluate their abilities to reach consistent solutions according to computation, time, and communication costs in an abstract domain where spacecraft propose joint measurements.

Mars↗
NASA NTRS2003

Continual coordination through shared activities

Interacting agents that interleave planning and execution must reach consensus on their commitments to each other. In domains where agents have varying degrees of interaction and different constraints on communication and computation, agents will require different coordination protocols in order to efficiently reach consensus in real time. We briefly describe a largely unexplored class of realtime, distributed planning problems (inspired by interacting spacecraft missions), new challenges they pose, and a general approach to solving the problems. These problems involve self-interested agents that have infrequent communication but collaborate on joint activities. We describe a Shared Activity Coordination (SHAC) framework that provides a decentralized algorithm for negotiating the scheduling of shared activities over the lifetimes of separate missions, a soft, real-time approach to reaching consensus during execution with limited communication, and a foundation for customizing protocols for negotiating planner interactions. We apply SHAC to a realistic simulation of interacting Mars missions and illustrate the simplicity of protocol development.

planning↗
NASA NTRS2007

Collaborative Resource Allocation

Collaborative Resource Allocation Networking Environment (CRANE) Version 0.5 is a prototype created to prove the newest concept of using a distributed environment to schedule Deep Space Network (DSN) antenna times in a collaborative fashion. This program is for all space-flight and terrestrial science project users and DSN schedulers to perform scheduling activities and conflict resolution, both synchronously and asynchronously. Project schedulers can, for the first time, participate directly in scheduling their tracking times into the official DSN schedule, and negotiate directly with other projects in an integrated scheduling system. A master schedule covers long-range, mid-range, near-real-time, and real-time scheduling time frames all in one, rather than the current method of separate functions that are supported by different processes and tools. CRANE also provides private workspaces (both dynamic and static), data sharing, scenario management, user control, rapid messaging (based on Java Message Service), data/time synchronization, workflow management, notification (including emails), conflict checking, and a linkage to a schedule generation engine. The data structure with corresponding database design combines object trees with multiple associated mortal instances and relational database to provide unprecedented traceability and simplify the existing DSN XML schedule representation. These technologies are used to provide traceability, schedule negotiation, conflict resolution, and load forecasting from real-time operations to long-range loading analysis up to 20 years in the future. CRANE includes a database, a stored procedure layer, an agent-based middle tier, a Web service wrapper, a Windows Integrated Analysis Environment (IAE), a Java application, and a Web page interface.

Wang, Yeou-Fang↗
NASA NTRS2006

Conflict-Aware Scheduling Algorithm

conflict-aware scheduling algorithm is being developed to help automate the allocation of NASA s Deep Space Network (DSN) antennas and equipment that are used to communicate with interplanetary scientific spacecraft. The current approach for scheduling DSN ground resources seeks to provide an equitable distribution of tracking services among the multiple scientific missions and is very labor intensive. Due to the large (and increasing) number of mission requests for DSN services, combined with technical and geometric constraints, the DSN is highly oversubscribed. To help automate the process, and reduce the DSN and spaceflight project labor effort required for initiating, maintaining, and negotiating schedules, a new scheduling algorithm is being developed. The scheduling algorithm generates a "conflict-aware" schedule, where all requests are scheduled based on a dynamic priority scheme. The conflict-aware scheduling algorithm allocates all requests for DSN tracking services while identifying and maintaining the conflicts to facilitate collaboration and negotiation between spaceflight missions. These contrast with traditional "conflict-free" scheduling algorithms that assign tracks that are not in conflict and mark the remainder as unscheduled. In the case where full schedule automation is desired (based on mission/event priorities, fairness, allocation rules, geometric constraints, and ground system capabilities/ constraints), a conflict-free schedule can easily be created from the conflict-aware schedule by removing lower priority items that are in conflict.

Wang, Yeou-Fang↗
NASA NTRS2010

Operating and Managing a Backup Control Center

Due to the criticality of continuous mission operations, some control centers must plan for alternate locations in the event an emergency shuts down the primary control center. Johnson Space Center (JSC) in Houston, Texas is the Mission Control Center (MCC) for the International Space Station (ISS). Due to Houston s proximity to the Gulf of Mexico, JSC is prone to threats from hurricanes which could cause flooding, wind damage, and electrical outages to the buildings supporting the MCC. Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) has the capability to be the Backup Control Center for the ISS if the situation is needed. While the MSFC Huntsville Operations Support Center (HOSC) does house the BCC, the prime customer and operator of the ISS is still the JSC flight operations team. To satisfy the customer and maintain continuous mission operations, the BCC has critical infrastructure that hosts ISS ground systems and flight operations equipment that mirrors the prime mission control facility. However, a complete duplicate of Mission Control Center in another remote location is very expensive to recreate. The HOSC has infrastructure and services that MCC utilized for its backup control center to reduce the costs of a somewhat redundant service. While labor talents are equivalent, experiences are not. Certain operations are maintained in a redundant mode, while others are simply maintained as single string with adequate sparing levels of equipment. Personnel at the BCC facility must be trained and certified to an adequate level on primary MCC systems. Negotiations with the customer were done to match requirements with existing capabilities, and to prioritize resources for appropriate level of service. Because some of these systems are shared, an activation of the backup control center will cause a suspension of scheduled HOSC activities that may share resources needed by the BCC. For example, the MCC is monitoring a hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico. As the threat to MCC increases, HOSC must begin a phased activation of the BCC, while working resource conflicts with normal HOSC activities. In a long duration outage to the MCC, this could cause serious impacts to the BCC host facility s primary mission support activities. This management of a BCC is worked based on customer expectations and negotiations done before emergencies occur. I.

Marsh, Angela L.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Shared Activity Coordination

Interacting agents that interleave planning and execution must reach consensus on their commitments to each other. In domains where agents have varying degrees of interaction and different constraints on communication and computation, agents will require different coordination protocols in order to efficiently reach consensus in real time. We briefly describe a largely unexplored class of real-time, distributed planning problems (inspired by interacting spacecraft missions), new challenges they pose, and a general approach to solving the problems. These problems involve self-interested agents that have infrequent communication but collaborate on joint activities. We describe a Shared Activity Coordination (SHAC) framework that provides a decentralized algorithm for negotiating the scheduling of shared activities in a dynamic environment, a soft, real-time approach to reaching consensus during execution with limited communication, and a foundation for customizing protocols for negotiating planner interactions. We apply SHAC to a realistic simulation of interacting Mars missions and illustrate the simplicity of protocol development.

coordination↗
NASA NTRS2003

Small, Untethered, Mobile Robots for Inspecting Gas Pipes

Small, untethered mobile robots denoted gas-pipe explorers (GPEXs) have been proposed for inspecting the interiors of pipes used in the local distribution natural gas. The United States has network of gas-distribution pipes with a total length of approximately 109 m. These pipes are often made of iron and steel and some are more than 100 years old. As this network ages, there is a need to locate weaknesses that necessitate repair and/or preventive maintenance. The most common weaknesses are leaks and reductions in thickness, which are caused mostly by chemical reactions between the iron in the pipes and various substances in soil and groundwater. At present, mobile robots called pigs are used to inspect and clean the interiors of gas-transmission pipelines. Some carry magnetic-flux-leakage (MFL) sensors for measuring average wall thicknesses, some capture images, and some measure sizes and physical conditions. The operating ranges of pigs are limited to fairly straight sections of wide transmission- type (as distinguished from distribution- type) pipes: pigs are too large to negotiate such obstacles as bends with radii comparable to or smaller than pipe diameters, intrusions of other pipes at branch connections, and reductions in diameter at valves and meters. The GPEXs would be smaller and would be able to negotiate sharp bends and other obstacles that typically occur in gas-distribution pipes.

Wilcox, Brian↗
NASA NTRS2011

Defining Tolerance: Impacts of Delay and Disruption when Managing Challenged Networks

Challenged networks exhibit irregularities in their communication performance stemming from node mobility, power constraints, and impacts from the operating environment. These irregularities manifest as high signal propagation delay and frequent link disruption. Understanding those limits of link disruption and propagation delay beyond which core networking features fail is an ongoing area of research. Various wireless networking communities propose tools and techniques that address these phenomena. Emerging standardization activities within the Internet Research Task Force (IRTF) and the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) look to build upon both this experience and scalability analysis. Successful research in this area is predicated upon identifying enablers for common communication functions (notably node discovery, duplex communication, state caching, and link negotiation) and how increased disruptions and delays affect their feasibility within the network. Networks that make fewer assumptions relating to these enablers provide more universal service. Specifically, reliance on node discovery and link negotiation results in network-specific operational concepts rather than scalable technical solutions. Fundamental to this debate are the definitions, assumptions, operational concepts, and anticipated scaling of these networks. This paper presents the commonalities and differences between delay and disruption tolerance, including support protocols and critical enablers. We present where and how these tolerances differ. We propose a set of use cases that must be accommodated by any standardized delay-tolerant network and discuss the implication of these on existing tool development.

mobility drivers↗
NASA NTRS2012

Gigabit Ethernet Asynchronous Clock Compensation FIFO

Clock compensation for Gigabit Ethernet is necessary because the clock recovered from the 1.25 Gb/s serial data stream has the potential to be 200 ppm slower or faster than the system clock. The serial data is converted to 10-bit parallel data at a 125 MHz rate on a clock recovered from the serial data stream. This recovered data needs to be processed by a system clock that is also running at a nominal rate of 125 MHz, but not synchronous to the recovered clock. To cross clock domains, an asynchronous FIFO (first-in-first-out) is used, with the write pointer (wprt) in the recovered clock domain and the read pointer (rptr) in the system clock domain. Because the clocks are generated from separate sources, there is potential for FIFO overflow or underflow. Clock compensation in Gigabit Ethernet is possible by taking advantage of the protocol data stream features. There are two distinct data streams that occur in Gigabit Ethernet where identical data is transmitted for a period of time. The first is configuration, which happens during auto-negotiation. The second is idle, which occurs at the end of auto-negotiation and between every packet. The identical data in the FIFO can be repeated by decrementing the read pointer, thus compensating for a FIFO that is draining too fast. The identical data in the FIFO can also be skipped by incrementing the read pointer, which compensates for a FIFO draining too slowly. The unique and novel features of this FIFO are that it works in both the idle stream and the configuration streams. The increment or decrement of the read pointer is different in the idle and compensation streams to preserve disparity. Another unique feature is that the read pointer to write pointer difference range changes between compensation and idle to minimize FIFO latency during packet transmission.

Duhachek, Jeff↗
NASA NTRS2012

Automating Mid- and Long-Range Scheduling for NASA's Deep Space Network

NASA has recently deployed a new mid-range scheduling system for the antennas of the Deep Space Network (DSN), called Service Scheduling Software, or S(sup 3). This system is architected as a modern web application containing a central scheduling database integrated with a collaborative environment, exploiting the same technologies as social web applications but applied to a space operations context. This is highly relevant to the DSN domain since the network schedule of operations is developed in a peer-to-peer negotiation process among all users who utilize the DSN (representing 37 projects including international partners and ground-based science and calibration users). The initial implementation of S(sup 3) is complete and the system has been operational since July 2011. S(sup 3) has been used for negotiating schedules since April 2011, including the baseline schedules for three launching missions in late 2011. S(sup 3) supports a distributed scheduling model, in which changes can potentially be made by multiple users based on multiple schedule "workspaces" or versions of the schedule. This has led to several challenges in the design of the scheduling database, and of a change proposal workflow that allows users to concur with or to reject proposed schedule changes, and then counter-propose with alternative or additional suggested changes. This paper describes some key aspects of the S(sup 3) system and lessons learned from its operational deployment to date, focusing on the challenges of multi-user collaborative scheduling in a practical and mission-critical setting. We will also describe the ongoing project to extend S(sup 3) to encompass long-range planning, downtime analysis, and forecasting, as the next step in developing a single integrated DSN scheduling tool suite to cover all time ranges.

scheduling↗