SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
Static aerodynamic research related to aircraft configurations in their cruise or combat modes is discussed. Subsonic transport aircraft, transonic tactical aircraft, and slender wing aircraft are considered. The status and plans of Langley's NTF configuration research program are reviewed. Recommendations for near term configuration research are made.
“No”- “not”- “can’t do it” – these words don’t fly in M2020 Mission Operations. The M2020 Surface Mission Operations Team trained for landing the Perseverance Rover under COVID-19 remote work/mandatory stay-at-home conditions. Training activities included presenting Flight Schools to the team via video conferencing, training COVID personal safety requirements to on-premises staff, and constantly updating and communicating COVID restrictions to the team as safety requirements changed. This paper explores the impact of COVID on the Mission System Training for M2020 Mission Operations. The layers of COVID, aptly named the “COVID Tax” by team management, affected project roles, communications, personnel interactions, operations facility usage and training exercises practiced by the team. Flight Schools and Operational Readiness Tests (ORTs) are driving forces behind the surface mission operations training. These activities work hand-in-hand to prepare the team for landing day, surface operations that transition from cruise to nominal operations, and nominal operations. Under normal training conditions, Flight Schools and ORTs are only concerned with tactical operations for the Uplink (Command) Downlink (Analysis) and Campaign Implementation (Planning) Teams of scientists and system engineers. Due to COVID, and the necessity to maintain physical distance between people, training for the landing team needed to include the new category of COVID personal safety. COVID also necessitated remote teams and video conferencing of the entirety of Flight Schools. This reliance on distance learning had not been done on previous missions. We will explore the advantages and disadvantages of video conferencing as a training platform; training effectiveness in communicating and practicing the multiple changes to the COVID safety protocols; and the timing in which we received and responded to COVID directives. Additionally, this paper will review the practical measures taken by the on-premises team and how the team adapted during the readiness tests, landing, and early mission operations, as well as how the team responded to the post-vaccine ramping down of COVID Protocols. The M2020 Surface Mission Operations Team responded very well to the challenges of COVID. All pre-landing operational and COVID-related training was completed. Post-landing COVID Training was provided as needed to new on-premises personnel. Training presented on COVID for the first operational readiness test (ORT) consisted of 2.5 hours of training. Each ORT had COVID Training. A person who had participated in all of the ORTs from September 2020 – February 2021 would have received over 7 hours of COVID Training. By ORT-12 (approximately 8 weeks after the first ORT), the Training team consolidated the original COVID training to a one-hour COVID Basic Training course, with additional recommended training. The Basic training course was updated after landing, as vaccines became available. COVID Training had multiple Flight Schools in the self-directed Blackboard Learning system, as well as a Quick Reference Wiki for Onboarding of new on-premises personnel and keeping on-premises personnel up-to-date. COVID Training covered many topics including practical methods of 6-foot distancing, how to interact with an IT professional when help was needed at a workstation, and challenging indoor meal-eating protocols. COVID Training continued to be updated, as the lab and the project respond to the virus variants and federal, state and local ordinances.
While electricity planning practices vary by state and utility based on utility type and market structure, integrated resource planning (IRP) remains a prominent vehicle — even in states with centrally-organized wholesale electricity markets. IRP focuses on meeting forecasted long-term electricity needs. Typically, utilities have not considered impacts of design and operation of the low-voltage distribution network in IRP. With advanced capabilities of grid-edge technologies to generate and store electricity and provide load flexibility, and large utility investments in distribution systems, it's increasingly important to consider at least some distribution planning elements in IRP. This report considers the value proposition for doing so, such as reducing utility costs through resource co-optimization and strategic siting of grid-edge resources, and idenfities the most important touchpoints between planning for bulk power and distribution systems and provide a range of tactics for integrating these two processes.
Four demonstration and four emergency fire imaging missions completed: a) Thermal infrared imagery delivered in near real-time (5 to 15 minutes) to: 1) SoCal Emergency: FEMA, NIFC, NorthCom, California EOC; 2) Demo Flights: NIFC, Individual Fire Incident Commands. Imagery used for tactical and strategic decision making. Air Traffic Control gave excellent support. Mission plans flown in reverse. Real time requests for revisits of active fires. Added new fire during mission. Moved fire loiter points as fires moved. Real-time reroute around thunderstorm activity. Pre & Post flight telecons with FAA were held to review mission and discuss operational improvements. No issues with air traffic control during the 8 fire missions flown.
This paper presents the results of a computer simulation of the NASA Autonomous Flight Rules (AFR) concept for airborne self-separation in airspace shared with conventional Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) traffic. This study was designed to determine the impact of varying levels of intent information from IFR aircraft on the performance of AFR conflict detection and resolution. The study used Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS-B) to supply IFR intent, but other methods such as an uplink from a ground-based System Wide Information Management (SWIM) network could alternatively supply this information. The independent variables of the study consist of the number of ADS-B trajectory change reports broadcast by IFR aircraft and the time interval between those reports. The conflict detection and resolution metrics include: the number of conflicts and losses of separation, the average conflict warning time, and the amount of time spent in strategic vs. tactical flight modes (i.e., whether the autoflight system was decoupled from the planned route in the Flight Management System in order to respond to a short-notice traffic conflict). The results show a measurable benefit of broadcasting IFR intent vs. relying on state-only broadcasts. The results of this study will inform ongoing separation assurance research and FAA NextGen design decisions for the sharing of trajectory intent information in the National Airspace System.
The Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE) satellite successfully completed its 148-day science investigation in a low-altitude, near-equatorial lunar orbit on April 18, 2014. The LADEE spacecraft was built, managed and operated by NASA's Ames Research Center (ARC). The Mission Operations Center (MOC) was located at Ames and was responsible for activity planning, command sequencing, trajectory and attitude design, orbit determination, and spacecraft operations. The Science Operations Center (SOC) was located at Goddard Space Flight Center and was responsible for science planning, data archiving and distribution. This paper details attitude design and operations support for the LADEE mission. LADEE's attitude design was shaped by a wide range of instrument pointing requirements that necessitated regular excursions from the baseline one revolution per orbit "Ram" attitude. Such attitude excursions were constrained by a number of flight rules levied to protect instruments from the Sun, avoid geometries that would result in simultaneous occlusion of LADEE's two star tracker heads, and maintain the spacecraft within its thermal and power operating limits. To satisfy LADEE's many attitude requirements and constraints, a set of rules and conventions was adopted to manage the complexity of this design challenge and facilitate the automation of ground software that generated pointing commands spanning multiple days of operations at a time. The resulting LADEE Flight Dynamics System (FDS) that was developed used Visual Basic scripts that generated instructions to AGI's Satellite Tool Kit (STK) in order to derive quaternion commands at regular intervals that satisfied LADEE's pointing requirements. These scripts relied heavily on the powerful "align and constrain" capability of STK's attitude module to construct LADEE's attitude profiles and the slews to get there. A description of the scripts and the attitude modeling they embodied is provided. One particular challenge analysts faced was in the design of LADEE maneuver attitudes. A flight rule requiring pre-maneuver verification of in-flight maneuver conditions by ground operators prior to burn execution resulted in the need to accommodate long periods in the maneuver attitude. This in turn complicated efforts to satisfy star tracker interference and communication constraints in lunar orbit. In response to this challenge, a graphical method was developed and used to survey candidate rotation angles about the thrust vector. This survey method is described and an example of its use on a particular LADEE maneuver is discussed. Finally, the software and methodology used to satisfy LADEE's attitude requirements are also discussed in the context of LADEE's overall activity planning effort. In particular, the way in which strategic schedules of instrument and engineering activities were translated into actual attitude profiles at the tactical level, then converted into precise quaternion commands to achieve those pointing goals is explained. In order to reduce the risk of time-consuming re-planning efforts, this process included the generation of long-term projections of constraint violation predictions for individual attitude profiles that could be used to establish keep-out time-frames for particular attitude profiles. The challenges experienced and overall efficacy of both the overall LADEE ground system and the attitude components of the Flight Dynamics System in meeting LADEE's varied pointing requirements are discussed.
This Cognitive Task Analysis (CTA) study was designed to understand the capability of the m:N Tactical Operator (TO) interfaces developed by the Human-Autonomy Teaming Laboratory at NASA Ames to support operators responsible for simplified pilot operations of 100 independently operated small UAS (sUAS) in a constrained geographic area. The m:N sUAS TO interface includes a central Tactical Situation Display (TSD) digital map with moving icons reflecting the sUAS location and planned flight route. The interface also has two side panels. The left panel includes a tabular list of UAS assets and mission tasking, a list of recently viewed assets, and a list of events and alerts. The right panel includes a tabular list of UAS assets and their associated telemetry, text-based chat communication window, and a tabbed checklist window. This CTA was adapted from the incident-based applied cognitive task analysis (Militello & Hutton, 1998) and included demographics questions, scenario-based simulations, a task diagram and knowledge audit methods. In addition to examining the support provided by this m:N sUAS TO interface, this CTA study, conducted with aviation subject matter experts in analogous roles to the future tactical operator, was designed to illuminate and project likely cognitive requirements of the tactical operator. Interviewees participated in two scenario-based simulations using the m:N sUAS TO interfaces. In the first simulation, the interviewees supervised 12 sUAS operating in downtown San Diego, California transiting to and from a central sUAS Hive, restaurant locations, and customer drop off locations. Interviewees were asked to react to a UAS Volume Reservation (UVR) event with a two-phase impact on food delivery operations. In the second scenario, the interviewees supervised 100 sUAS operating in the same airspace and with the same mission. Interviewees used the interfaces to recognize and react to two sUAS air vehicle problems. After each scenario, we asked the interviewees a semi-structured list of questions to elicit their reflections about using the interfaces. Interviewees were confident in their ability to respond to two off-nominal situations in each simulation. Interviewees felt that, given high levels of automation on the sUAS, they would be able to manage the events without requiring additional support or handing off the sUAS to a colleague or supervisor in both the n=12 or n=100 sUAS settings. In the n=12 sUAS condition, interviewees used the center map to understand the asset location and progress along with mission tasking. An additional display window, Asset Telemetry, helped interviewees understand battery state and sUAS altitude. When the number of sUAS increased, interviewees altered their behavior. Rather than maintaining awareness of individual assets, interviewees appeared to become more reactive, managing exceptions. Interviewees reported that they spent less time looking at the nominal aircraft, and focused their attention primarily on the off-nominal aircraft. In addition, in the second simulation with n=100 sUAS, interviewees reported that they relied more on the side panels (Mission Timeline and Asset Telemetry) to gather information.
This paper includes the summary, lessonslearned, and upcoming plans for the first 210 Mars solar days(sols) of the mission. The focus of the paper is on roboticoperations which has the primary responsibility for strategicplanning, uplink commanding and downlink analysis forrover mobility and navigation, robotic arm operation, thesampling and caching capability including coring, theadaptive caching assembly and the 2nd sample handlingrobotic arm, and interface to the Mars helicopter Ingenuity.As of Sol 210 the rover has driven 2663.65 meters, executed20764 robotic arm and sampling commands, and hassuccessfully completed 13 helicopter flights covering 2382meters horizontal distance. It includes the OperationsReadiness Tests in preparation for landing, landing and initialcheckouts, strategic route planning to the science destinationand waypoints, surface checkout of all of the roboticscapability of the rover. It also discusses the strategic planningand tactical agility needed for interleaving scienceinvestigation and technology demonstration of the Marshelicopter flights where a minimum distance had to bemaintained between the rover and helicopter during flights. Itdiscusses the challenges with planning robotic operations andaddressing anomalies with the larger uncertainty presentduring early mission operations. It also discusses the impacton robotic operations from lessons incorporated fromprevious missions.
The control automation and interaction paradigm (e.g., manual, autopilot, flight management system) used on virtually all large highly automated aircraft has long been an exemplar of breakdowns in human factors and human-centered design. An alternative paradigm is the Haptic Flight Control System (HFCS) that is part of NASA Langley Research Center s Naturalistic Flight Deck Concept. The HFCS uses only stick and throttle for easily and intuitively controlling the actual flight of the aircraft without losing any of the efficiency and operational benefits of the current paradigm. Initial prototypes of the HFCS are being evaluated and this paper describes one such evaluation. In this evaluation we examined claims regarding improved situation awareness, appropriate workload, graceful degradation, and improved pilot acceptance. Twenty-four instrument-rated pilots were instructed to plan and fly four different flights in a fictitious airspace using a moderate fidelity desktop simulation. Three different flight control paradigms were tested: Manual control, Full Automation control, and a simplified version of the HFCS. Dependent variables included both subjective (questionnaire) and objective (SAGAT) measures of situation awareness, workload (NASA-TLX), secondary task performance, time to recognize automation failures, and pilot preference (questionnaire). The results showed a statistically significant advantage for the HFCS in a number of measures. Results that were not statistically significant still favored the HFCS. The results suggest that the HFCS does offer an attractive and viable alternative to the tactical components of today s FMS/autopilot control system. The paper describes further studies that are planned to continue to evaluate the HFCS.
This document describes Management by Trajectory (MBT), a concept for future air traffic management (ATM) in which every flight operates in accordance with a four-dimensional trajectory (4DT) that is negotiated between the airspace user and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to respect the airspace user's goals while complying with National Airspace System (NAS) constraints. In the present-day NAS, the ATM system attempts to predict the trajectory for each flight based on the approved flight plan and scheduled or controlled departure time. However, once the aircraft starts to move, controllers tactically manage the aircraft to implement traffic management restrictions, separate otherwise conflicting aircraft, and address arising NAS constraints. Tactical controller actions are not directly communicated to the automation systems or other stakeholders. Furthermore, the initial trajectory prediction does not anticipate these disruptions or how they will impact the flight. Consequently, and compounded by gaps in required data and models, trajectory predictions are less accurate than possible, which affects Traffic Flow Management (TFM) performance. A cornerstone of the MBT concept is that all air vehicles have, at all times, an assigned 4DT from their current state to their destination. These assigned trajectories consist of trajectory constraints and descriptions. Pilots and air traffic controllers, with the aid of automation, operate the aircraft to comply with the assigned trajectory, unless first negotiating a revision. Equipped aircraft have substantial responsibility for complying with the assigned trajectory without controller intervention. To maximize the operational flexibility available to the airspace user, the assigned trajectory only imposes trajectory constraints as required to achieve the ATM goals of NAS constraint compliance and aircraft separation. Trajectory descriptions are added to the assigned trajectory to ensure sufficient predictability. To further improve trajectory prediction accuracy, airspace users supplement the assigned trajectory by broadcasting intent information and updating it as necessary. Air vehicle intent is a more detailed description of the airspace user's plan for how the flight will fly the assigned trajectory. Air vehicle intent can change freely, without negotiation, as long as it remains in compliance with the assigned trajectory. Aircraft assigned trajectories, air vehicle intent, and predicted trajectories are shared, creating a common view among stakeholders. A NAS Constraint Service gathers and publishes information about all known NAS constraints, enabling airspace users to be informed participants in trajectory negotiation. Trajectory constraints in the assigned trajectory are mapped to NAS constraints to facilitate identifying which aircraft are affected when NAS constraints change. To support efficient trajectory negotiation, all aircraft provide current information about air vehicle capabilities. Assigned trajectories are constructed to satisfy all known NAS constraints, improving trajectory stability and predictability. Uncertainty and disruptions are handled by modifying the assigned trajectory as far in advance as possible. By proactively negotiating changes to the assigned trajectory, rather than relying on controller-selected tactical actions such as vectors to resolve traffic conflicts or implement miles-in-trail restrictions, MBT keeps aircraft on closed trajectories that are fully known to all stakeholders. Since reactive air traffic control actions cannot be predicted in advance, the downstream trajectory cannot be accurately predicted until they happen. Reliable trajectory predictions allow the system to identify needed modifications to trajectories further in advance, where they can be negotiated and communicated as amendments (i.e., additional or altered trajectory constraints) to the assigned trajectory. Decision Support Tools (DSTs) aid controllers in rapidly defining and communicating closed trajectories to the aircraft and support all stakeholders in trajectory negotiation. Anticipated MBT benefit mechanisms include more accurate trajectory predictions, improved ATM performance and robustness to off-nominal conditions, increased flexibility and operational efficiency, reduced impediments to emerging classes of airspace users accessing NAS resources, reduced environmental impacts, and enhanced safety.
The national airspace has evolved over many years to accommodate increased traffic demand [1] while simultaneously maintaining one of the safest forms of transportation [2], [3]. One of the reasons for this success is the ability of the system and the operators to adapt and accommodate to situations that routinely disrupt optimal operations. These situations may include: adverse weather, delays, early arrivals, equipment outages, and other factors that are outside the operators ability to control. These factors can lead to states where automation is unable to properly handle these issues and therefore air traffic controllers and pilots have to intervene, ultimately increasing communication between operators resulting in higher workload. As controller workload increases to handle sub-optimal operating conditions this can be viewed as an increase in complexity. The reasoning for this is because humans are now required to make tactical decisions in response to external factors, resulting in a departure from the strategic plan where operations would be more efficiently managed. Human operators control airspace complexity under rigid regulations that are constantly changing. The airspace is divided into sectors and the number of aircraft assigned to each controller is limited for safe handling. There has been past work that devised airspace complexity metrics in commercial aviation and related these metrics to controller workload (e.g., [4],[5]). The upper bounds on the system load are pre-determined. Such bounds on complexity make for a safe system, but the system cannot scale and adapt to autonomous, dense, and heterogeneous traffic, including the many types of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) envisioned to be added to the operations. We hypothesize that, as traffic density and heterogeneity grow, and other key metrics change, there will be phase transitions at which the way traffic should be managed changes significantly [6]. We offer a method for in-time detection of contributing factors that lead to phase transitions, characterized by increased complexity. To the best of our knowledge, there is no tool similar to our proposed effort that identifies such contributing factors or precursor patterns. To define the scope we are proposing to measure complexity from the viewpoint of the Terminal Radar Approach Control Facilities (TRACON) controller’s perspective. In particular we are analyzing arrivals into KSFO. With safety as the top concern for airspace operators, it is important to recognize that as density and heterogeneity grow, the focus of the system will change. Times of the day when the airspace has low density and heterogeneity, the flights will follow more efficient paths where the aircraft move on established routes that are more or less directly to the destination. However, when density and heterogeneity increases, the system will begin changing focus to avoiding conflicts and collisions and route the flights in a more flexible way. Higher flexibility requires more communication and coordination between controllers and pilots which the current automation is unable to handle. This paper proposes a novel approach that monitors airspace complexity at multiple scales, uses a Machine Learning-based tool that predicts when operations will transition to a regime of greater complexity, and identifies actions that can reduce the complexity while still maintaining efficient and safe operations. We demonstrate our proposed approach using data from multiple complementary sources. This includes, but is not limited to: historical aircraft surveillance data from NASA’s Sherlock Data Warehouse [7], METAR weather data, and airport configuration data from Aviation System Performance Metrics (ASPM). The surveillance data flight paths are sampled at a variable sample rate — increasing as the aircraft approaches the airport. This is due to how Sherlock manages flight track stitching between different radar facilities which have different sampling rates. The weather and performance data are logged at defined intervals throughout the day at a courser refresh rate. In addition to the logged data and metrics, we leverage pre-defined Standard Terminal Arrival Routes (STARs) procedures to characterize the path of each flight. Each flight files for one of these routes in the flight plan well before entering the terminal airspace, and approximately follows the route until it leaves the STAR, typically on the final fix of a runway transition. However, most flights do not always fly the full STAR procedure to completion [8], but the majority do adhere to the fixes within the common route of the procedure. Our approach leverages fixes in the common route of each of the STARs to build a reference path to the airport. This allows us to characterize the flight paths in what we are defining as the “maneuvering area” (the airspace between the STAR and before the flight is lined up on the runway’s final approach) to determine how off nominal the flights are to calculate its complexity score. Determining airspace complexity is a concept that does not have a concrete answer. In designing this metric, we consider what increases the workload for the air traffic controllers. Consequently more specialized vectoring maneuvers results in higher workload. Accordingly, we start with a theory: each flight has a direct path it takes from the STAR’s common route to the final approach’s outer marker fix for the flight’s landing runway. It is important to note that the direct path is only used as a reference. If the majority of the flights have a large consistent offset as compared to other routes it does not necessarily mean that those flights have higher complexity. We are merely building a distribution based on this direct path for that particular STAR and runway pair to determine the normal mode of operations for that route. Flights that are in the upper tail of these distributions will result in higher complexity scores and flights that fly in the median will represent the normal mode of operations and therefore will have lower complexity scores. Since flights following each STAR route take different paths to the airport, we have a different distribution for each STAR route and therefore can model these distributions to compute a complexity score from their respective normalized distributions. To evaluate the effectiveness of our proposed airspace complexity metric we will compare against an established approach based on trajectory clustering [9]. This unsupervised learning technique consists of the following steps: (1) identify the general maneuvering areas (waypoints) by performing $\kappa$-means or DBSCAN clustering on locations where aircraft frequently turn based on the surveillance radar track data, (2) map flight trajectories onto sequences of waypoints, and (3) cluster the sequences based on their common subsequences. From a high-level perspective, this baseline model learns nominal operations in the airspace through the sequence of waypoints that are representative of where aircraft change direction and defines deviations from the nominal operations as “complex.” Therefore, more deviations from the nominal operations correspond to higher complexity values. For our validation, we re-implemented this technique and tune model hyper-parameters to correctly detect waypoints for the arrival traffic into the San Francisco bay area. We will compute the complexity measure over a one-year period using our proposed technique as well as the baseline. Our validation will be based on each technique’s ability to detect a set of undesirable outcomes (e.g., go-arounds, holding patterns, average time in the airspace, etc.). Since our current complexity metric is derived from the offset from the direct reference path, it’s important to understand what causes these offsets. In many of the flights with high offset distance, flights performing holding patterns and S turns can be observed. These maneuvering tactics are utilized to add distance between the aircraft and the destination runway to prevent multiple flights from having conflicting arrival times. In order to predict a rise in complexity (or the precursor to complexity), it’s necessary to be able to identify these potential conflicts (which in turn, result in higher offsets). To do this, we define a “representative flight” for each STAR route and runway pair. This flight is approximately the path the flight would take if there was a clear path with no other flights in the airspace — including the time remaining to the airport. We first identify the flights for a given STAR runway pair using the offset to the reference path distributions that fall between the 44-55 percentiles. This yields the flights that conform to the most normal mode of operation. Each of these flights is partitioned based on the percent complete from the entry point into the maneuvering areas from 0\% – 100\% complete. Then for each percent “bin”, we take the median value of the flight’s latitude/longitude coordinates, airspeed, and (non causal) time remaining to the airport to construct a lookup table for each percent complete bin on a given route. As a flight enters the maneuvering area, we can find the estimated arrival time of a flight to the airport by finding the closest point to the representative path’s percent complete bin (relative to the flight’s current position at any snapshot in the airspace) and therefore retrieve the corresponding remaining time left on the “representative path”. We assume that the flight will follow the representative path to completion when deriving these estimates. We can then compare these estimated arrival times against other flights for the same snapshot in time to identify potential conflicts. If more flights are estimated to arrive within a tolerance window than there are runways available, then we have a potential conflict. We can use this derived measure along with other factors expected to add disruption to the operation such as weather and runway configuration changes as an input to machine learning tools to detect precursors that increases in our complexity measure. This novel method will assist in uncovering insights into the contributing factors that lead to increased complexity that may allow for in-time responses to avoid reaching a high complexity state in the airspace.
Introduction: NASA’s VIPER mission presents a unique operational paradigm within the history of robotic spaceflight. The proximity of the Moon to the Earth and the terrain elements (surface characteristics, light/shadow dynamics, communication links) of the lunar South Polar landing site create unprecedented operational conditions between these two planetary bodies. Apollo era lunar science and exploration included humans in situ to operate instruments and assimilate observational inputs in real-time. Previous lunar orbital missions have worked to operational timescales, e.g., decisional timelines and communication exchanges, that were weeks in length. Mars rover missions have worked to operational timescales, e.g., decisional timelines and communication exchanges between Mars and Earth, that were hours, days, and weeks in length. In the case of the VIPER mission, our operational decisioning for rover driving and instrument commanding will be compressed to minute-scale timeframes. These operational conditions directly impact the manner and speed with which the VIPER Science Team (VST) is required to synthesize and analyze data and produce timely science-driven decisions throughout surface mission operations. The VST shall provide mission enhancing scientific input to guide rover traverse planning and drill site confirmation and selection throughout surface operations. Further, the VST input will be of vital importance to the mission’s ability to maximize science return and to meet broader NASA objectives for future lunar in-situ resource utilization (ISRU)and exploration activities. The VST co-located in the Mission Science Center (MSC) will be responsive to the tactical operational cadence of the Mission Operations Center (MOC) and will provide further strategic and Long-Term Planning (LTP) guidance to the mission. The VIPER Science Operations & Integration(SO&I)team has developed an architecture that is focused on the infusion of science-decisioning into the operational framework and execution cadence of VIPER. NASA analog research has played a significant role in the construction of the VIPER science operations systems. As an example, the SO&I team has led analog missions that have focused on bringing together expertise in the sciences (natural, applied and social) and in operations in service of learning how to build and hold together interdisciplinary work environments and what tools are needed to support high tempo, high intensity integrated decisioning. These experiences have provided an essential foundation of knowledge to the VIPER team. Those analogs that specifically influenced the VIPER science operations construct were identified through a process of comparative analysis to prioritize those that offered relevance in whole or in part, and those that did not. The analog research output that provided extensibility to the VIPER science operations architecture included remote teams of humans and robots in cooperation (synchronous and asynchronous) with simulated earthbound systems, engineering and science teams, and the integrated assembly of tools that supported scientific analysis and data synthesis and provided infrastructure for the remote testing framework. Analogs which included real-time data monitoring, synthesis, visualization and access in a democratized and operationalized manner were of particular interest to the development of the VIPER MSC toolset both in terms of the technology and the processes used to develop the supporting infrastructure. We anticipate that each subsequent mission to the lunar south pole, whether with robots or humans, will be able to optimize science and exploration return by evolving strategies to infuse real-time collaborative science-decisioning. Furthermore, these efforts will result in a foundation for science operations development in support of human-robotic exploration of deep space and Mars. NASA analogs can continue to provide the opportunity to prepare, test and iterate on the operational concepts and tools that will support these ever-expanding space exploration efforts. Our presentation will include an overview of the VIPER Science Operations & Integration development process and specifics on what aspects of analog research have had a significant impact on our work systems.
The Intelligent Launch Decision Support System project is developing a Time Management System (TMS) for the NASA Test Director (NTD) to use for time management during Shuttle terminal countdown. TMS is being developed in three phases: an information phase; a tool phase; and an advisor phase. The information phase is an integrated display (TMID) of firing room clocks, of graphic timelines with Ground Launch Sequencer events, and of constraints. The tool phase is a what-if spreadsheet (TMWI) for devising plans for resuming from unplanned hold situations. It is tied to information in TMID, propagates constraints forward and backward to complete unspecified values, and checks the plan against constraints. The advisor phase is a situation advisor (TMSA), which proactively suggests tactics. A concept prototype for TMSA is under development. The TMID is currently undergoing field testing. Displays for TMID and TMWI are described. Descriptions include organization, rationale for organization, implementation choices and constraints, and use by NTD.
A quarterly listing of RTO technical publications is presented. The topics include: Handbook on the Analysis of Smaller-Scale Contingency Operations in Long Term Defence Planning; 2) Radar Polarimetry and Interferometry; 3) Combat Casualty Care in Ground-Based Tactical Situations: Trauma Technology and Emergency Medical Procedures; and 4) RTO Technical Publications: A Quarterly Listing
The paper describes the innovative numerical algorithms and the command sequence simulation used by the MER mission for planning surface operations.
This paper describes a tactical maneuvering system that uses an artificial immune system based approach for selecting maneuver sequences. This approach combines the problem solving abilities of genetic algorithms with the memory retention characteristics of an immune system. Of significant importance here is the fact that the tactical maneuvering system can make time-critical decisions to accomplish near-term objectives within a dynamic environment. These objectives can be received from a human operator, autonomous executive, or various flight planning specialists. Simulation tests were performed using a high performance military aircraft model. Results demonstrate the potential of using immunized sequence selection in order to accomplish tactical maneuvering objectives ranging from flying to a location while avoiding unforeseen obstacles, to performing relative positioning in support of air combat maneuvering.
Advanced energy technologies have the potential to enhance energy security and resilience; however, they can introduce new vulnerabilities even as they mitigate existing ones. This dichotomy highlights that both action and inaction carry strategic risks in a contested and logistically complex operating environment. Regardless of U.S. civilian or military adoption of such technologies, key allies and adversaries are on adoption paths that will impact the U.S. military at the tactical, operational, and strategic level. The global adoption of advanced energy technologies presents the potential for both positive and negative consequences for U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) missions in the next 10-20 years. Three categories of risk drivers are presented in this analysis: infrastructure-related, adoption-related, and response-related. Each risk type can generate consequences for DOD, including power disruptions, suboptimal DOD mission performance and operational effectiveness, higher costs and shortages for both legacy and advanced energy technologies, and loss of U.S. influence and strategic deterrent value. Specific impacts could include tactical impacts, operational impacts, and strategic impacts. Mitigation strategies could include energy resource and technology planning, cybersecurity, supply chain resilience, workforce development, exercises and simulations, investments in commercialized technology, operational testing and pilot programs, research into emerging technologies, partnerships and working groups, common standards, budget planning, and repurposing infrastructure.
The increasing presence of airport surface surveillance technologies has spawned a strong interest in airport surface traffic management research; the vast majority has assumed that the airport’s runway configuration is known and constant. Tactical Runway Configuration Management (TRCM), one component of NASA’s System Oriented Runway Management concept, plans the airport configuration to optimize traffic efficiency for the forecast weather, traffic, and other factors. While planning runway configuration can provide benefit and is required by other automation concepts, larger benefits are possible by planning other airport configuration decisions, such as runway assignment policies, that are currently made manually by controllers. A laboratory prototype of the TRCM algorithm which selects optimal airport configuration schedules has been implemented and studied within a simulation environment. The presentation will describe simulation results for several airports, under various weather and traffic conditions. The sequence of airport configurations recommended by TRCM result in significantly less delay than the airport configurations that were actually used by controllers, illustrating both the potential benefit from airport configuration optimization and the ability of TRCM to provide effective airport configuration schedules. The application to several, distinct airports demonstrates the approach is capable of handling the differences between airports with a common algorithm, while providing decision support that respects the current procedures at those airports. Consequently, TRCM is able to be deployed to any airport within the current National Airspace System. The TRCM algorithmic approach is also extensible to future operational scenarios. NASA is in the process of transferring the initial TRCM technology to the FAA. Future research will extend the concept and algorithm to provide coordinated plans for metroplex airports and study NextGen applications.