Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Mission Operations”

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 991 records · Page 55
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2009

Human Factors in Training

Future space missions will be significantly longer than current shuttle missions and new systems will be more complex than current systems. Increasing communication delays between crews and Earth-based support means that astronauts need to be prepared to handle the unexpected on their own. As crews become more autonomous, their potential span of control and required expertise must grow to match their autonomy. It is not possible to train for every eventuality ahead of time on the ground, or to maintain trained skills across long intervals of disuse. To adequately prepare NASA personnel for these challenges, new training approaches, methodologies, and tools are required. This research project aims at developing these training capabilities. By researching established training principles, examining future needs, and by using current practices in space flight training as test beds, both in Flight Controller and Crew Medical domains, this research project is mitigating program risks and generating templates and requirements to meet future training needs. Training efforts in Fiscal Year 08 (FY08) strongly focused on crew medical training, but also began exploring how Space Flight Resource Management training for Mission Operations Directorate (MOD) Flight Controllers could be integrated with systems training for optimal Mission Control Center (MCC) operations. The Training Task addresses Program risks that lie at the intersection of the following three risks identified by the Project: (1) Risk associated with poor task design (2) Risk of error due to inadequate information (3) Risk associated with reduced safety and efficiency due to poor human factors design

Barshi, Immanuel↗
NASA NTRS2010

Human Factors in Training

Future space missions will be significantly longer than current shuttle missions and new systems will be more complex than current systems. Increasing communication delays between crews and Earth-based support means that astronauts need to be prepared to handle the unexpected on their own. As crews become more autonomous, their potential span of control and required expertise must grow to match their autonomy. It is not possible to train for every eventuality ahead of time on the ground, or to maintain trained skills across long intervals of disuse. To adequately prepare NASA personnel for these challenges, new training approaches, methodologies, and tools are required. This research project aims at developing these training capabilities. By researching established training principles, examining future needs, and by using current practices in space flight training as test beds, both in Flight Controller and Crew Medical domains, this research project is mitigating program risks and generating templates and requirements to meet future training needs. Training efforts in Fiscal Year 09 (FY09) strongly focused on crew medical training, but also began exploring how Space Flight Resource Management training for Mission Operations Directorate (MOD) Flight Controllers could be integrated with systems training for optimal Mission Control Center (MCC) operations. The Training Task addresses Program risks that lie at the intersection of the following three risks identified by the Project: 1) Risk associated with poor task design; 2) Risk of error due to inadequate information; and 3) Risk associated with reduced safety and efficiency due to poor human factors design.

Barshi, Immanuel↗
NASA NTRS1994

(abstract) Automated Constraint Checking of Spacecraft Command Sequences

Making certain that spacecraft command sequences do not violate any constraints is often tedious and expensive in terms of both personnel and software development. To reduce this cost, we have pursued the development of a flexible system for specifying models of spacecraft behavior in response to commands as well as constraints on that behavior. The potential need for modeling complex spacecraft behavior required that the system be designed to be usable both on a conventional workstation and a parallel supercomputer. Finally, it needed to be intuitive enough for the the intended mission operations users to easily design sets of rules and models to automate tedious, resource-consuming constraint checking of commands. We have defined a Specification And Verification Environment (SAVE) for spacecraft flight rules.

automation spacecraft command sequences constraint↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Assessment of Crew Time for Maintenance and Repair Activities for Lunar Surface Missions

NASA is currently evaluating different methods to predict how much time crewmembers will spend conducting repair and maintenance activities on future space missions. As mission scope and spacecraft architectures change, understanding how crew repair and maintenance timelines are impacted by mission operations and technology changes is vital for future mission planning. Past work has been done using historical International Space Station (ISS) data to accurately predict crew habitation and operation timelines, resulting in the development of NASA’s Exploration Crew Time Model (ECTM). However, understanding crew maintenance and repair requirements has posed a unique challenge due to the complexity of available datasets, the probabilistic nature of sub-system failures, and the impacts of reliability growth on failure rates. This paper presents a methodology to collect and condition empirical repair and maintenance time data from available datasets, to extrapolate from that data to estimate projected maintenance and repair times for a lunar Surface Habitat (SH), and to assess how uncertainty in repair time could impact utilization time on the lunar surface. NASA ISS maintenance and crew time data are logged into two central databases: the Maintenance Data Collection (MDC) and the Operations Planning Timeline Integration System (OPTimIS). Separately, each of these two datasets capture only portions of the complete set of data required to generate an accurate assessment of crew time spent on maintenance activities at a sub-system level. To create a more useful crew time estimate for maintenance timelines, the authors developed a methodology to capture relevant data from each set and combine and utilize that data by linking crew time requirements to specific components. The authors compare the failure logs in the MDC to crew activity logs pulled from OPTimIS and then process the data to estimate required repair time for each failure and repair event. The entire maintenance activity dataset is then categorized based on the class of failed component to ensure a significant sample size for each class and accurate crew time estimates for any components lacking relevant data. This resultant component repair time data can be used in the future to generate Mean Time to Repair (MTTR) estimates and confidence intervals for each class of component based on a probabilistic distribution of documented maintenance events. These improved MTTR values can then be applied to candidate element sub-system architectures, along with component Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) data to generate distributions for potential required system crew repair time estimates for a given mission. The authors applied these modeling methods to a case study of a crewed mission to the planned SH and produced expected corrective maintenance crew time distributions. The results produced an expected corrective maintenance crew time at over 24 hours per mission, and a maintenance crew time distribution that reflects the importance of planning for sufficient maintenance requirements each mission. Repair time distributions can then be used to develop more accurate crew schedules and to assess potential available utilization time.

Crew Time↗
NASA NTRS2004

Onboard Autonomy on the Earth Observing One Mission

The Earth Observing One Spacecraft is currently flying The Autonomous Sciencecraft Experiment (ASE) - onboard autonomy software to improve science return. The ASE software enables the spacecraft to autonomously detect and respond to science events occurring on the Earth. ASE includes software systems that perform science data analysis, mission planning, and run-time robust execution. In this article we describe the autonomy flight software and how it enables a new paradigm of autonomous science and mission operations.

autonomy↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

2023 Artemis Crew Health and Performance System Model Development

While the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) utilizes a Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System to represent all the Agency’s efforts to ensure the health and performance of NASA astronauts, there is no shared mental model of a CHP system at NASA. Some groups may consider a CHP system to be only a medical kit, while others may not be using the concept at all. To facilitate the integration of functions and capabilities to ensure astronaut health and performance during vehicle development, HRP has proposed a CHP Shared Mental Model derived from the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards (NASA-STD-3001 Vol.1/Vol.2). [1] Even though many vehicle, ground, and communication systems as well as mission operations are modeled for the Artemis Campaigns, no mission level CHP system model was created to achieve the intent of the HRP CHP Shared Mental Model. The lack of this model renders it difficult to visualize and understand how the many programs work together to provide the necessary cross program functions and capabilities to ensure the health and performance of the crew throughout an Artemis mission. For this purpose, the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element of HRP developed a CHP system model for the Artemis III and IV missions to provide a view of how each program contributes to and interacts with the overall CHP system. To develop the 2023 Artemis CHP system model, ExMC leveraged existing data and models from the Moon to Mars Program Office, the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) and the Orion, Gateway, Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility (EHP) and Human Landing System (HLS) programs. By using a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach, existing requirements, functions, and concepts of operations were combined to create a single system model focused on representing CHP from the launch to the return to Earth segments of the Artemis III and IV missions. Additionally, by incorporating the HRP Systems Platform for Aggregating and Relating Capabilities, or SPARC tool, the data from the programs was also related back to the 2nd volume of the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standard (NASA-STD-3001, Vol.2) and the human system risks identified by the Human System Risk Board (HSRB). The first version of the 2023 Artemis CHP system model was baselined in Fall of 2023 after the model was demonstrated to be a potentially useful tool for systems engineers integrating CHP capabilities in vehicle development as well as members of the Health and Medical Technical Authority providing oversight of those programs. The model may also be useful to any stakeholder of astronaut health and performance by providing insights on how an Artemis mission satisfies the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards as well as how they mitigate the HSRB Human System Risks. This presentation highlights how the model was developed and the possible benefits of the model. [1] NASA HRP (2022), Crew Health and Performance System Whitepaper

Systems engineering↗
NASA NTRS2024

2023 Artemis Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System Model Development

While the NASA Human Research Program (HRP) utilizes a Crew Health and Performance (CHP) System to represent all the Agency’s efforts to ensure the health and performance of NASA astronauts, there is no shared mental model of a CHP system at NASA. Some groups may consider a CHP system to be only a medical kit, while others may not be using the concept at all. To facilitate the integration of functions and capabilities to ensure astronaut health and performance during vehicle development, HRP has proposed a CHP Shared Mental Model derived from the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards (NASA-STD-3001 Vol.1/Vol.2). [1] Even though many vehicle, ground, and communication systems as well as mission operations are modeled for the Artemis Campaigns, no mission level CHP system model was created to achieve the intent of the HRP CHP Shared Mental Model. The lack of this model renders it difficult to visualize and understand how the many programs work together to provide the necessary cross program functions and capabilities to ensure the health and performance of the crew throughout an Artemis mission. For this purpose, the Exploration Medical Capability (ExMC) element of HRP developed a CHP system model for the Artemis III and IV missions to provide a view of how each program contributes to and interacts with the overall CHP system. To develop the 2023 Artemis CHP system model, ExMC leveraged existing data and models from the Moon to Mars Program Office, the Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer (OCHMO) and the Orion, Gateway, Extravehicular Activity and Human Surface Mobility (EHP) and Human Landing System (HLS) programs. By using a Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) approach, existing requirements, functions, and concepts of operations were combined to create a single system model focused on representing CHP from the launch to the return to Earth segments of the Artemis III and IV missions. Additionally, by incorporating the HRP Systems Platform for Aggregating and Relating Capabilities, or SPARC tool, the data from the programs was also related back to the 2nd volume of the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standard (NASA-STD-3001, Vol.2) and the human system risks identified by the Human System Risk Board (HSRB). The first version of the 2023 Artemis CHP system model was baselined in Fall of 2023 after the model was demonstrated to be a potentially useful tool for systems engineers integrating CHP capabilities in vehicle development as well as members of the Health and Medical Technical Authority providing oversight of those programs. The model may also be useful to any stakeholder of astronaut health and performance by providing insights on how an Artemis mission satisfies the NASA Human Health, Medical, and Performance Spaceflight Standards as well as how they mitigate the HSRB Human System Risks. This presentation highlights how the model was developed and the possible benefits of the model. [1] NASA HRP (2022), Crew Health and Performance System Whitepaper

Systems engineering↗
NASA NTRS2023

Human Factors Support for On-Orbit Servicing, Assembly and Manufacturing Mission 1 (OSAM-1)

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) Human Factors Technical Discipline Team was requested by the Satellite Servicing Projects Division at Goddard Space Flight Center to provide support in assessing the design of the On-Orbit Servicing, Assembly and Manufacturing Mission 1 (OSAM-1) Mission Operations Center in light of concerns about overcrowding and potential for distractions, as well as assistance in creating a Human-Machine Interface style guide for OSAM-1 user interface design. This report contains the outcome of the NESC assessment.

On-Orbit Servicing, Assembly and Manufacturing Mis↗
NASA NTRS2019

Preparing General Mission Analysis Tool for Operational Maneuver Planning of the Advanced Composition Explorer Mission

The General Mission Analysis Tool (GMAT) is an open-source space mission design, analysis and trajectory optimization tool. GMAT is developed by a team of NASA, private industry, public and private contributors. GMAT is designed to model, optimize and estimate spacecraft trajectories in flight regimes ranging from low Earth orbit to lunar applications, interplanetary trajectories and other deep space missions. GMAT has also been flight qualified to support operational maneuver planning for the Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE) mission. ACE was launched in August, 1997 and is orbiting the Sun-Earth L1 libration point. The primary science objective of ACE is to study the composition of both the solar wind and the galactic cosmic rays. Operational orbit determination, maneuver operations and product generation for ACE are conducted by NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) Flight Dynamics Facility (FDF). This paper discusses the entire engineering lifecycle and major operational certification milestones that GMAT successfully completed to obtain operational certification for the ACE mission. Operational certification milestones such as gathering of the requirements for ACE operational maneuver planning, gap analysis, test plans and procedures development, system design, pre-shadow operations, training to FDF ACE maneuver planners, shadow operations, Test Readiness Review (TRR) and finally Operational Readiness Review (ORR) are discussed. These efforts have demonstrated that GMAT is flight quality software ready to support ACE mission operations in the FDF.

mission design↗
NASA NTRS2010

Stardust Blazes MOA Trail

Mission Operations Assurance (MOA) started at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) with the Magellan and Galileo missions of the late 80's. It continued to develop and received a significant impetus with the failures of two successive missions to Mars in the late 90's. MOA continued to evolve with each successive project at JPL achieving its current maturity with the Stardust sample return to Earth.

operations assurance mission↗
NASA NTRS2015

AMO EXPRESS: A Command and Control Experiment for Crew Autonomy Onboard the International Space Station

NASA is investigating a range of future human spaceflight missions, including both Mars-distance and Near Earth Object (NEO) targets. Of significant importance for these missions is the balance between crew autonomy and vehicle automation. As distance from Earth results in increasing communication delays, future crews need both the capability and authority to independently make decisions. However, small crews cannot take on all functions performed by ground today, and so vehicles must be more automated to reduce the crew workload for such missions.NASAs Advanced Exploration Systems Program funded Autonomous Mission Operations (AMO) project conducted an autonomous command and control experiment on-board the International Space Station that demonstrated single action intelligent procedures for crew command and control. The target problem was to enable crew initialization of a facility class rack with power and thermal interfaces, and involving core and payload command and telemetry processing, without support from ground controllers. This autonomous operations capability is enabling in scenarios such as initialization of a medical facility to respond to a crew medical emergency, and representative of other spacecraft autonomy challenges. The experiment was conducted using the Expedite the Processing of Experiments for Space Station (EXPRESS) rack 7, which was located in the Port 2 location within the U.S Laboratory onboard the International Space Station (ISS).

Autonomous Mission Operations↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Mission Architecture for the Green Propulsion Dual Mode Mission

Current spacecraft propulsion technologies are broadly divided into chemical and electric propulsion modes, each of which has unique advantages. It is common for both systems to have a place in interplanetary spacecraft, but the size, weight, and power required to carry two separate propulsion systems is extremely limiting for small spacecraft such as CubeSats. The upcoming NASA STMD-funded Green Propulsion Dual Mode (GPDM) mission will demonstrate on-orbit a novel dual-mode propulsion system known as the GPDM Propulsion System that uses the AF-M315E/ASCENT green monopropellant to feed both a chemical 100 mN monopropellant thruster and four electrospray thrusters. GPDM will fly a 6U CubeSat in low Earth orbit and perform orbit-raising and lowering maneuvers to characterize the performance of this dual-mode propulsion technology, enabling a new generation of future interplanetary small satellite explorers. The Georgia Institute of Technology Space Systems Design Laboratory (SSDL) is conducting the design, assembly, integration, testing, and mission operations of the GPDM host spacecraft, as well as the integration of the GPDM Propulsion System payload, designed by NASA’s Marshall Spaceflight Center (MSFC). The NASA Marshall Space Flight Center is overseeing the overall GPDM project as well as specific technology development activities of the GPDM Propulsion System, while electrospray thrusters are supplied by the MIT Space Propulsion Lab, with additional components supplied by MMA Design, Blue Canyon Technologies, Quasonix, Xiphos, and Rubicon Space Systems. The GPDM spacecraft will carry the GPDM Propulsion System into orbit and use a high-power S-band radio to enable real-time operations in low Earth orbit (LEO) via the NASA Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System (TDRSS). The mission is working towards a tentative launch readiness date of August 2025, in support of launch and operations commencing in January 2026. This paper describes GPDM’s overall mission concept of operations, spacecraft overview, and subsystem breakdown.

Green Propulsion Dual Mode↗
NASA NTRS2017

Impacts of Launch Vehicle Fairing Size on Human Exploration Architectures

Human missions to Mars, particularly to the Martian surface, are grand endeavors that place extensive demands on ground infrastructure, launch capabilities, and mission systems. The interplay of capabilities and limitations among these areas can have significant impacts on the costs and ability to conduct Mars missions and campaigns. From a mission and campaign perspective, decisions that affect element designs, including those based on launch vehicle and ground considerations, can create effects that ripple through all phases of the mission and have significant impact on the overall campaign. These effects result in impacts to element designs and performance, launch and surface manifesting, and mission operations. In current Evolvable Mars Campaign concepts, the NASA Space Launch System (SLS) is the primary launch vehicle for delivering crew and payloads to cis-lunar space. SLS is currently developing an 8.4m diameter cargo fairing, with a planned upgrade to a 10m diameter fairing in the future. Fairing diameter is a driving factor that impacts many aspects of system design, vehicle performance, and operational concepts. It creates a ripple effect that influences all aspects of a Mars mission, including: element designs, grounds operations, launch vehicle design, payload packaging on the lander, launch vehicle adapter design to meet structural launch requirements, control and thermal protection during entry and descent at Mars, landing stability, and surface operations. Analyses have been performed in each of these areas to assess and, where possible, quantify the impacts of fairing diameter selection on all aspects of a Mars mission. Several potential impacts of launch fairing diameter selection are identified in each of these areas, along with changes to system designs that result. Solutions for addressing these impacts generally result in increased systems mass and propellant needs, which can further exacerbate packaging and flight challenges. This paper presents the results of the analyses performed, the potential changes to mission architectures and campaigns that result, and the general trends that are more broadly applicable to any element design or mission planning for human exploration.

Jefferies, Sharon↗
NASA NTRS2002

MDP: Reliable File Transfer for Space Missions

This paper presents work being done at NASA/GSFC by the Operating Missions as Nodes on the Internet (OMNI) project to demonstrate the application of the Multicast Dissemination Protocol (MDP) to space missions to reliably transfer files. This work builds on previous work by the OMNI project to apply Internet communication technologies to space communication. The goal of this effort is to provide an inexpensive, reliable, standard, and interoperable mechanism for transferring files in the space communication environment. Limited bandwidth, noise, delay, intermittent connectivity, link asymmetry, and one-way links are all possible issues for space missions. Although these are link-layer issues, they can have a profound effect on the performance of transport and application level protocols. MDP, a UDP-based reliable file transfer protocol, was designed for multicast environments which have to address these same issues, and it has done so successfully. Developed by the Naval Research Lab in the mid 1990's, MDP is now in daily use by both the US Post Office and the DoD. This paper describes the use of MDP to provide automated end-to-end data flow for space missions. It examines the results of a parametric study of MDP in a simulated space link environment and discusses the results in terms of their implications for space missions. Lessons learned are addressed, which suggest minor enhancements to the MDP user interface to add specific features for space mission requirements, such as dynamic control of data rate, and a checkpoint/resume capability. These are features that are provided for in the protocol, but are not implemented in the sample MDP application that was provided. A brief look is also taken at the status of standardization. A version of MDP known as NORM (Neck Oriented Reliable Multicast) is in the process of becoming an IETF standard.

Rash, James↗
NASA NTRS2022

ISS Payload Operations Training Throughout the COVID-19 Pandemic: Impacts, Opportunities and Solutions

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic brought a dramatic and rapid transformation to almost every aspect of humanity. The world’s space agencies and their missions were not immune to the wide-sweeping changes. One discipline principally affected was mission operations and the various groups supporting that function. Mission support teams, especially for complex and crewed missions like the International Space Station (ISS) were forced to rethink how and where control center staff performed their vital work. Operations training – an essential element to mission ops, had unique hurdles to overcome. Operations training is responsible for preparing astronaut crews for their missions, training and certifying flight controllers, as well as ensuring that new team members are ready to join their colleagues. Every element of training was impacted during the pandemic. From orientation and introductory classes for new controllers, simulations, and advanced lessons, On the Job Training (OJT) and final evaluations; all aspects faced challenges. Trainers at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama were forced to become more efficient with trainees and resources to continue supporting ISS payload operations. The pandemic arrived in the USA in March 2020. Immediately, NASA mandated that the support for ISS real-time operations was critical. As a result, physical access to key facilities was restricted. Trainers and trainees had to quickly shift to 100% remote learning. In the short term, this was not a problem. However, instructors discovered lessons they were accustomed to delivering in a classroom environment often did not translate to remote teaching. Another hurdle to operations training was the mandate that all simulations could only be held remotely. The logistics of even small simulations proved to be challenging due to Information Technology (IT) restrictions and public internet limitations. With simulations essentially halted, as well as the restrictions on most OJT, trainees were essentially stopped in their advancement towards certification. Once limitations were identified, trainers prioritized new options. Transitioning to all electronic learning materials was a relatively easy fix. Teaching to large groups took additional shifts in the training paradigm. Methods for preparing astronauts for their missions were revised. Simulation supervisors found efficient techniques to provide realistic training experiences. Communication and coordination with management was essential. In every case, the payload operations instructors found novel solutions to all functions listed. This paper discusses the factors and solutions payloads operations trainers found to keep scientific research on the ISS flying forward to mission success.

ISS↗
NASA NTRS2006

The Application of Architecture Frameworks to Modelling Exploration Operations Costs

Developments in architectural frameworks and system-of-systems thinking have provided useful constructs for systems engineering. DoDAF concepts, language, and formalisms, in particular, provide a natural way of conceptualizing an operations cost model applicable to NASA's space exploration vision. Not all DoDAF products have meaning or apply to a DoDAF inspired operations cost model, but this paper describes how such DoDAF concepts as nodes, systems, and operational activities relate to the development of a model to estimate exploration operations costs. The paper discusses the specific implementation to the Mission Operations Directorate (MOD) operational functions/activities currently being developed and presents an overview of how this powerful representation can apply to robotic space missions as well.

Department of Defense Architecture Framework (DoDA↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

ISS Payload Operations Training During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Impacts and Solutions

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic brought a dramatic and rapid transformation to almost every aspect of humanity in 2020. The world’s space agencies and their missions were not immune to the wide-sweeping changes. One discipline principally affected was mission operations and the various groups supporting that function. Mission support teams, especially for complex and crewed missions like the International Space Station were forced to rapidly rethink how and where control center staff performed their vital work. Operations training – an essential element to mission ops, had unique hurdles to overcome. Operations training is responsible for preparing astronaut crews for their missions, providing training to flight controllers, as well as ensuring that new team members are ready to join their colleagues. Every element of training was impacted by COVID restrictions. From orientation and introductory classes for new controllers, simulations and advanced lessons, On the Job Training and final evaluations; all aspects faced new challenges. Trainers at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Alabama, were forced to become more efficient with trainees and resources to continue supporting payload operations. The pandemic started in the USA in March 2020. Immediately, NASA mandated that the support for ISS real-time operations was critical. As a result, physical access to key facilities was restricted. Trainers and trainees had to quickly shift to 100 percent remote learning. In the short term, this was not a problem. However, instructors discovered lessons that they were accustomed to delivering in a classroom environment did not translate to remote teaching. Another hurdle to operations training was the mandate that all simulations could only be held remotely. The logistics of even small simulations proved to be challenging due to IT restrictions and public internet limitations. With simulations essentially stopped, as well as the restrictions on most OJT, trainees were essentially stopped in their advancement towards certification. Once limitations were identified, trainers prioritized new options. Transitioning to all electronic learning materials was a relatively easy fix. Teaching to large groups took additional shifts in the training paradigm. Methods for preparing astronauts for their missions were revised. Simulation supervisors found more efficient techniques to provide realistic training experience. Communication and approvals from management was essential. In every case, the payload operations instructors found novel solutions to all functions listed. This paper will discuss the factors and solutions payloads operations trainers found to keep scientific research on the ISS flying forward to mission success.

ISS↗
NASA NTRS2019

Recommendation for a Medical System Concept of Operations for Gateway Missions

NASA’s exploration missions to cis-lunar space will establish a permanent gateway to future transport missions to Mars. These missions mandate a significant paradigm change for mission planning, spacecraft design, human systems integration, and in-flight medical care due to constraints on mass, volume, power, resupply, and medical evacuation capability. These constraints require medical system development to be tightly integrated with mission and habitat design to provide a sufficient medical infrastructure and enable mission success. This concept of operations provides a vision of medical care needs that will be used to guide the development of a medical system for the cis-lunar Gateway Habitat. This medical system will serve as the precursor to what is implemented in future exploration missions to Mars. This concept of operations documents an overview of the stakeholder needs and system goals of a medical system and provides examples of the types of activities for which the system will be used during the mission. This concept of operations informs the ExMC systems engineering effort to define the Gateway Habitat Medical System by documenting the medical activities and capabilities relevant to Gateway missions, as identified by the ExMC clinician community. In addition, this concept of operations will inform the subsequent systems engineering process of developing technical requirements, system architectures, interfaces, and verification and validation approaches for the medical system. This document supports the closure of ExMC Gap Med01: We do not have a concept of operations for medical care during exploration missions, corresponding to the ExMC-managed human system risk: Risk of Adverse Health Outcomes & Decrements in Performance due to Inflight Medical Conditions.

Rubin, David↗