Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “ESA”

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 127 records · Page 7
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2006

Nuclear Thermal Propulsion Requirements Analysis of the ESAS Reference Human Mars Mission Architecture

The Nuclear Thermal Propulsion Mission and System Analysis (NTP MSA) Phase 2 Study was initiated by Marshall Space Flight Center’s (MSFC) Advanced Concepts Office (VP11) in December, 2005 in support of MSFC’s Nuclear Systems Office (VP31) NTP for Exploration Study. The Mission and Systems Analysis Study was task # 6 of a set of 14 tasks within the NTP for Exploration Study. The primary goal of the NTP MSA Phase 2 Study was to identify the range of potential NTP engine and vehicle requirements for NASA Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) Mars human exploration reference mission.

mars↗
NASA NTRS2006

Moving from Bilateral to Multilateral Medical Operations

When the ISS Integrated Medical Group moved to a multilateral configuration for the ASTROLAB mission, several challenges were encountered and overcome that allowed for a streamlined operational experience. Dating back to the early 1990s, the European Space Agency (ESA) has sent flight surgeon and Biomedical Engineering (BME) personnel to NASA-JSC and Russia to train for space flight operational support. This training was tailored towards the needs of particular Shuttle/Soyuz missions, and more generally for eventual ISS support. With the announcement of the ASTROLAB mission, NASA and ESA personnel worked together to develop a detailed training template for ESA BMEs to ensure successful support of the mission from the European Astronaut Center (EAC). This training included the deployment of ESA BMEs to JSC, as well as the development of a rotation of ISS-certified NASA BMEs to the EAC. In addition to training, NASA, ESA, and the Russian Federal Space Agency (FSA) worked together preflight to develop multilateral flight control support concepts and implementation plans. This resulted in flight control support schedules, operational rules of engagement, and the delineation of responsibilities. NASA also assisted ESA with the development and deployment of workstation displays to allow the ESA medical flight control team to monitor ISS telemetry from the EAC. The goal of this presentation is to provide details of the preflight preparation and in-flight support of the ASTROLAB mission by the ESA, NASA, and FSA medical support teams. In addition, it will identify lessons learned that will be implemented for future multilateral endeavors.

Roden, S.↗
NASA NTRS2019

Challenges and Opportunities of International Cooperation for Safety & Mission Assurance (SMA) on the European Service Module (ESM) of the Orion Program

ESA is providing the ESM to NASA for the Orion Program in accordance with the Implementing Arrangement (IA) established between the two Agencies in 2012. This IA is a barter agreement, in which ESA provides Service Module vehicles for the first two flights of Orion in exchange for two servicing missions to the ISS. This arrangement has provided opportunities and challenges to both communities. It represents an important opportunity for ESA to build on its experience in the development and operations of ATV and play an active role in the development and flight of a manned space vehicle. This paper will explore some of the unique aspects of this arrangement as it affects Safety & Mission Assurance (SMA).The assessment of ESM compliance with applicable safety requirements is the responsibility of the Joint Safety and Engineering Review Panel (JSERP). The JSERP has two features that are relatively unique amongst NASA safety panels. First, NASA Engineering and SMA organizations co-chair this Panel. Previously, Safety has chaired, with Engineering as a member of the Panel. Inclusion of Engineering as a co-chair has offered greater leverage within the technical community. Second, the JSERP includes a second set of co-chairs from ESA Engineering and ESA Product Assurance and Safety (PA/S) organizations. This recognizes the international arrangement as one of partnership.Another source of both opportunity and challenge is the differing experience base of ESA and NASA. NASA has decades of experience in manned spaceflight, dating back to the Mercury program and following through Gemini, Apollo, Apollo-Soyuz, Skylab, Shuttle and the International Space Station. The risk posture for manned missions is much more rigorous than for unmanned missions. ESA brings a wealth of knowledge as well, with their flights of Ariane and Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV), development and operation of the Columbus module on ISS, and satellite programs. The result is that both parties have developed paradigms related to risk and failure that contribute to ESM discussions.Orion represents humanity's first venture beyond Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) in over fifty years. Much of that experience is captured in program documents, but first-hand knowledge is limited to a few spaceflight veterans. Missions to LEO have offered the opportunity of direct, near-instantaneous communications and assistance, and the ability to return to Earth within a matter of hours in case of emergency. Outward-bound missions do not have these features and will require a more autonomous spacecraft with attendant safety-related issues.This paper will explore these and other challenges as we approach the flight of the first Orion vehicle.

Ciancone, Michael L.↗
NASA NTRS2024

Exploring Earth's Interface with Space: The Scientific Case for a Satellite Mission to the Lower Thermosphere-Ionosphere Transition Region

The ESA-NASA Lower Thermosphere-Ionosphere Science (ENLoTIS) Working Group was formed in May 2022 to cooperatively explore future lower thermosphere-ionosphere (LTI) satellite mission concepts, targeting very low altitudes (100-200 km) with in situ sampling of relevant geophysical parameters associated with the neutral atmosphere, the ionosphere’s plasma, electromagnetic fields, and energetic particles, which, together with modeling, would enable significant advancements in the understanding of neutral-ion interactions and other related science and space weather topics in this critical region of Geospace. The LTI region has been identified as one of considerable interest to both NASA and ESA. Most recently, the Daedalus mission study was carried out under the remit of ESA’s Earth Observation Programmes (EOP) Directorate competitive Earth Explorer 10 pre-feasibility (Phase 0) activities. Furthermore, many NASA studies have also focused on the LTI region, including both directed missions with dipping spacecraft, such as the initial TIMED dual-satellites and the GEC constellation, as well as numerous highly-rated Explorer proposals targeting the LTI. Although the Daedalus mission was not selected, the ESA Advisory Committee on Earth Observation (ACEO) ranked it highly on scientific grounds and encouraged further study activities to mature the concept, exploring potential international collaboration. Subsequent bilateral discussions with NASA’s Science Mission Directorate (SMD) noted that such a concept was in alignment with the 2020 SMD science plan – Science 2020-2024: A Vision for Scientific Excellence – along with other complimentary activities within the NASA Heliophysics Division. Building on NASA’s and ESA’s long history of very successful collaborations, this mutual interest in LTI science led to the establishment of a new inter-agency and cross-discipline science connection, linking the ESA EOP Climate Action, Sustainability and Science Department and the NASA Heliophysics Division. Initial exploratory discussions led to the formation of the ENLoTIS Working Group, which was directed to explore the science case behind a potential joint LTI mission. Members of the ENLoTIS Working Group are listed below, consisting of 7 scientists from ESA Member and Cooperating States and 7 scientists from the United States. The working group held 3 “in person” meetings over the course of 18 months, interspersed with regular virtual meetings on a more frequent basis. This report constitutes their chief findings and recommendations.

thermosphere↗
NASA NTRS2024

Additively Manufactured Plastic Plasma Spectrometer

We report results in development and testing of a low resource top hat electrostatic analyzer (ESA) for space plasma measurements. This device has been additively manufactured (3D-printed) using fused deposition modeling. The classic top hat design is composed of four plastic pieces, without any surface coatings. The three conducting electrodes are printed from carbon nanotube infused polyether ether ketone (CNT-PEEK). The fourth piece, an insulating electrode support, uses pure PEEK. This ESA is designed to detect electrons in space from 10eV up to 30 keV. We demonstrate that the printed CNT-PEEK is sufficiently electrically conductive to support the fast high voltage slewing often required for high time resolution measurements. The plastic ESA has been successfully vibrated beyond standard pre-flight levels, tested under keV electron beam illumination over a wide range of temperatures, and tested under UV illumination, simulating the solar Ly-α flux. In comparison with an identical machined aluminum ESA, our CNT-PEEK ESA provides nominal energy/angle band passes, closely matching simulation. These band passes imply minimal impact from surface charging at beam energies of 2-3 keV, although more investigation is needed. We also find that the CNT-PEEK ESA provides far superior out-of-band electron rejection and UV photon rejection compared to the machined aluminum ESA. We do not detect any problems with trapped gases or outgassing. This development offers potential for significant mass savings, implementation of otherwise unattainable geometric configurations, and dramatic simplification in manufacturing and assembly processes required for development of space plasma instruments.

Quetzal Larrick↗
NASA NTRS1995

A transatlantic perspective on the European Space Agency

International cooperation in space activities is discussed with emphasis on the cooperation between NASA and ESA. Discussions on the following aspects are included: the origins of space activities; ESA's role in space; ESA's contribution to space activities and some ESA projects and spacecraft; the relationship between NASA and ESA and some of the results of this partnership, including the Hubble Space Telescope and Ulysses; the manned space flight results of this partnership, including Spacelab; space and microgravity experimentation; the future of space activities and international cooperation in space, and ESA's role in this future.

Holloway, Harry C.↗
NASA NTRS2006

NASA Langley Research Center Systems Analysis & Concepts Directorate Participation in the Exploration Systems Architecture Study

The NASA Langley Research Center (LaRC) Systems Analysis & Concepts Directorate (SACD) began studying human exploration missions beyond low Earth orbit (LEO) in the year 1999. This included participation in NASA s Decadal Planning Team (DPT), the NASA Exploration Team (NExT), Space Architect studies and Revolutionary Aerospace Systems Concepts (RASC) architecture studies that were used in formulating the new Vision for Space Exploration. In May of 2005, NASA initiated the Exploration Systems Architecture Study (ESAS). The primary outputs of the ESAS activity were concepts and functional requirements for the Crewed Exploration Vehicle (CEV), its supporting launch vehicle infrastructure and identification of supporting technology requirements and investments. An exploration systems analysis capability has evolved to support these functions in the past and continues to evolve to support anticipated future needs. SACD had significant roles in supporting the ESAS study team. SACD personnel performed the liaison function between the ESAS team and the Shuttle/Station Configuration Options Team (S/SCOT), an agency-wide team charged with using the Space Shuttle to complete the International Space Station (ISS) by the end of Fiscal Year (FY) 2010. The most significant of the identified issues involved the ability of the Space Shuttle system to achieve the desired number of flights in the proposed time frame. SACD with support from the Kennedy Space Center performed analysis showing that, without significant investments in improving the shuttle processing flow, that there was almost no possibility of completing the 28-flight sequence by the end of 2010. SACD performed numerous Lunar Surface Access Module (LSAM) trades to define top level element requirements and establish architecture propellant needs. Configuration trades were conducted to determine the impact of varying degrees of segmentation of the living capabilities of the combined descent stage, ascent stage, and other elements. The technology assessment process was developed and implemented by SACD as the ESAS architecture was refined. SACD implemented a rigorous and objective process which included (a) establishing architectural functional needs, (b) collection, synthesis and mapping of technology data, and (c) performing an objective decision analysis resulting in technology development investment recommendations. The investment recommendation provided budget, schedule, and center/program allocations to develop required technologies for the exploration architecture, as well as the identification of other investment opportunities to maximize performance and flexibility while minimizing cost and risk. A summary of the trades performed and methods utilized by SACD for the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESAS) activity is presented along with how SACD is currently supporting the implementation of the Vision for Space Exploration.

Keyes, Jennifer↗
NASA NTRS2012

Building Transatlantic Partnerships in Space Exploration The MPCV-SM Study

Following the approval of the ESA ISS Exploitation Declaration for the ISS lifetime at the ESA Council Meeting in March 2011, ESA decided to partially offset the European obligations deriving from the extension of the ISS Programme until end 2020 with different means than ATVs, following the ATV-5 mission foreseen in mid 2014. The envisioned approach is based on a barter element(s) that would generate cost avoidance on the NASA side. NASA and ESA considered a number of Barter options, and concluded that the provision by ESA of the Service Module for the NASA Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (MPCV) was the barter with the most interest. A joint ESA - NASA working group was established to assess the feasibility of Europe developing this Module based on ATV heritage. The working group was supported by European and US industry namely Astrium, TAS-I and Lockheed-Martin. This paper gives an overview of the results of the on-going study as well as its perspective utilisation for the global space exploration endeavour.

Wilde Detlef↗
NASA NTRS2013

Technology Development Roadmap: A Technology Development Roadmap for a Future Gravitational Wave Mission

Humankind will detect the first gravitational wave (GW) signals from the Universe in the current decade using ground-based detectors. But the richest trove of astrophysical information lies at lower frequencies in the spectrum only accessible from space. Signals are expected from merging massive black holes throughout cosmic history, from compact stellar remnants orbiting central galactic engines from thousands of close contact binary systems in the Milky Way, and possibly from exotic sources, some not yet imagined. These signals carry essential information not available from electromagnetic observations, and which can be extracted with extraordinary accuracy. For 20 years, NASA, the European Space Agency (ESA), and an international research community have put considerable effort into developing concepts and technologies for a GW mission. Both the 2000 and 2010 decadal surveys endorsed the science and mission concept of the Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA). A partnership of the two agencies defined and analyzed the concept for a decade. The agencies partnered on LISA Pathfinder (LPF), and ESA-led technology demonstration mission, now preparing for a 2015 launch. Extensive technology development has been carried out on the ground. Currently, the evolved Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (eLISA) concept, a LISA-like concept with only two measurement arms, is competing for ESA's L2 opportunity. NASA's Astrophysics Division seeks to be a junior partner if eLISA is selected. If eLISA is not selected, then a LISA-like mission will be a strong contender in the 2020 decadal survey. This Technology Development Roadmap (TDR) builds on the LISA concept development, the LPF technology development, and the U.S. and European ground-based technology development. The eLISA architecture and the architecture of the Mid-sized Space-based Gravitational-wave Observatory (SGO Mid)-a competitive design with three measurement arms from the recent design study for a NASA-led mission after 2020-both use the same technologies. Further, NASA participation in an ESA-led mission would likely augment the eLISA architecture with a third arm to become the SGO Mid architecture. For these reasons, this TDR for a future GW mission applies to both designs and both programmatic paths forward. It is adaptable to the different timelines and roles for an ESA-led or a NASA-led mission, and it is adaptable to available resources. Based on a mature understanding of the interaction between technology and risk, the authors of this TDR have chosen a set of objectives that are more expansive than is usual. The objectives for this roadmap are: (1) reduce technical and development risks and costs; (2) understand and, where possible, relieve system requirements and consequences; (3) increase technical insight into critical technologies; and (4) validate the design at the subsystem level. The emphasis on these objectives, particularly the latter two, is driven by outstanding programmatic decisions, namely whether a future GW mission is ESA-led or NASA-led, and availability of resources. The relative emphasis is best understood in the context of prioritization.

Laser Interferometry Space Antenna↗
NASA NTRS2016

The NASA L3 Study

The Astrophysics Implementation Plan calls for a minority role in L3, planned for launch in 2034. L3 The third large mission in ESAs Cosmic Visions 2015-2025 Programme NASA and ESA have been discussing a collaboration for 2 years Gravitational Observatory Advisory Team (GOAT) ESA study evaluating and recommend scientific performance tradeoffs, detection technologies, technology development activities, data analysis capabilities, schedule and cost US representatives: Guido Mueller, Mark Kasevich, Bill Klipstein, RTS Started in October 2014, concluding with a final report in late Marchor early April 2016. ESA solicited interest from ESA Member States in November 2015 NASA is continuing technology development support. ESA is restarting technology development activities.

The L3 Study organization and charter have been es↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Biomass Harmonization and SAR Analysis with the Multi-mission Algorithm and Analysis Platform (MAAP)

The Multi‐mission Algorithm and Analysis Platform (MAAP) is a collaborative effort between NASA and the European Space Agency (ESA) to support above ground biomass (AGB) research in an open science framework. MAAP brings together relevant data, algorithms, and computing capabilities in a common cloud environment to address the challenges of sharing and processing data from field, airborne and satellite measurements. MAAP was publicly released in October 2021, providing computing capabilities co-located with the data, a collaborative coding and analysis environment, and a set of interoperable tools and algorithms developed to support the estimation and visualization of data. MAAP has allowed scientists from both North America and Europe to collaborate on the generation and analysis/visualization of data derived from multiple, discipline-adjacent missions in an open, collaborative environment that has reached beyond traditional scientific investigation. MAAP has been used to support multiple scientific activities. To date, existing LiDAR data from multiple platforms has been calibrated with field measurements and combined for more comprehensive and accurate estimates of above ground biomass AGB; these LiDAR platforms include airborne (e.g. LVIS), the International Space Station (NASA’s Global Ecosystem Dynamics Investigation (GEDI), and satellites (e.g. ICESat-2). The current challenge is to effectively and seamlessly combine the aforementioned LiDAR-based data with new data sources such as P-band RADAR from ESA’s upcoming BIOMASS mission, existing ESA Sentinel-1 C-band SAR, and the 30 PB/yr of high cadence global coverage L-band SAR data from the upcoming NASA-ISRO SAR (NISAR) mission. Recent analysis using MAAP merged ICESat-2 and optical data (Harmonized Landsat Sentinel) produced the most comprehensively precise estimate of boreal-wide AGB to date. Another effort using MAAP is the production and open distribution of global comparisons of AGB map estimates, including from ICESat-2 and GEDI, to bolster stakeholder uptake for policy applications. These map estimates will feed into the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) database, likely aiding the next Global Carbon Stocktake of the UNFCCC. Furthermore, the biomass retrieval intercomparison exercise BRIX-2 could benefit from the MAAP providing standardized test cases (based on airborne campaign and spaceborne data) allowing the community to develop and apply retrieval algorithms based on these test cases, while forthcoming SAR data training curricula could also use the MAAP as a teaching and learning platform. The MAAP is meeting the challenges inherent in international, open science collaboration and large scale computing with a platform that is entirely open source and cloud native, using open standards for data access, manipulation, protocols, and formats. The MAAP data system consists of a dedicated data store whose data is indexed in an online catalog conforming to established metadata, application programmatic interfaces (APIs), and service interface standards, using an implementation of the open sourced NASA Common Metadata Repository. Federation of user identities allows users from either NASA or ESA to access and consume services from the other using a unified metadata catalog for the data utilized across the ESA and NASA MAAP platforms. Similarly, we are exploring how to increase interoperability to achieve a common approach to packaging, orchestrating and executing algorithms, with interoperable access to data for subsetting, fast browse, and cloud-optimized access, all using interoperable standards such as those from the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC). Designed for interoperability, ESA and NASA utilize a common architecture for the software platform. It provides a cloud-based algorithm development environment (ADE) that enables scientists to develop algorithms collaboratively with access to the MAAP data catalog as well as other data archives. MAAP provides an Eclipse Che-based ADE supporting both Python and R languages, popular in this biomass community. Algorithms developed and containerized within the ADE can be deployed to run to thousands of computational nodes in the MAAP’s data processing system (DPS), dramatically speeding up processing and giving scientists a rapid, iterative turnaround of results. NASA’s implementation of the DPS is based on the Hybrid Science Data System (HySDS) framework, used by NASA flight projects to produce Earth science standard products.

cloud computing↗
NASA NTRS1993

The effect of sub-surface volume scattering on the accuracy of ice-sheet altimeter retracking algorithms

The NASA and ESA retracking algorithms are compared with an algorithm based upon a combined surface and volume (S/V) scattering model. First, the S/V, NASA, and ESA algorithms were used to retrack over 400,000 altimeter return waveforms from the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets. The surface elevations from the S/V algorithm were compared with the elevations produced by the NASA and ESA algorithms to determine the relative accuracy of these algorithms when subsurface volume-scattering occurs. The results show that the NASA algorithm produced surface elevations within 35 to 50 cm of the S/V algorithm, while the performance of the ESA algorithm was slightly worse. Next, by analyzing several thousand satellite crossover points from the Antarctic data set, we determined the retracking algorithm that produced the most repeatable surface elevations. The elevations derived from the S/V algorithm had the smallest RMS error for the region of the East Antarctic plateau examined here. The ESA algorithm produced erroneous estimates of elevation change when seasonal variations were present; it measured 0.7 to 1.6-m change in elevation over a 6-month period on the East Antarctic plateau where accumulation rates are only 10 cm/year.

Davis, Curt H.↗
NASA NTRS2001

Comparative Analysis of Daytime Fire Detection Algorithms, Using AVHRR Data for the 1995 Fire Season in Canda: Perspective for MODIS

Two fixed-threshold Canada Centre for Remote Sensing and European Space Agency (CCRS and ESA) and three contextual GIGLIO, International Geosphere and Biosphere Project, and Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (GIGLIO, IGBP, and MODIS) algorithms were used for fire detection with Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) data acquired over Canada during the 1995 fire season. The CCRS algorithm was developed for the boreal ecosystem, while the other four are for global application. The MODIS algorithm, although developed specifically for use with the MODIS sensor data, was applied to AVHRR in this study for comparative purposes. Fire detection accuracy assessment for the algorithms was based on comparisons with available 1995 burned area ground survey maps covering five Canadian provinces. Overall accuracy estimations in terms of omission (CCRS=46%, ESA=81%, GIGLIO=75%, IGBP=51%, MODIS=81%) and commission (CCRS=0.35%, ESA=0.08%, GIGLIO=0.56%, IGBP=0.75%, MODIS=0.08%) errors over forested areas revealed large differences in performance between the algorithms, with no relevance to type (fixed-threshold or contextual). CCRS performed best in detecting real forest fires, with the least omission error, while ESA and MODIS produced the highest omission error, probably because of their relatively high threshold values designed for global application. The commission error values appear small because the area of pixels falsely identified by each algorithm was expressed as a ratio of the vast unburned forest area. More detailed study shows that most commission errors in all the algorithms were incurred in nonforest agricultural areas, especially on days with very high surface temperatures. The advantage of the high thresholds in ESA and MODIS was that they incurred the least commission errors.

Ichoku, Charles↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Advanced Information Systems Technology for NASA Earth System Digital Twins (ESDT)

ESA and NASA have both started programs to design and develop Digital Twins of the Earth and/or Earth systems. Organized around interconnected, multi-domain, high-scale modeling capabilities, the three major components of an Earth System Digital Twin are a continuously updated Digital Replica of the Earth System of interest, dynamic Forecasting models, and Impact Assessment capabilities. Earth System Digital Twins integrate diverse Earth and human activity models, continuous observations, and information system capabilities to provide unified, comprehensive representations and predictions that can be utilized for monitoring the health of the Planet, as well as for developing actionable information to support decision making. More generally, Digital Twins will help researchers better understand the fundamental Earth systems that impact everything from wildfires to climate change. This Townhall will first provide a short description of ESA’s, NASA’s and CNES’s current efforts in Digital Twins: • Destination Earth (DestinE) is the first initiative of the European Union to create a Digital Twin of the Earth, particularly focused on weather and climate, and as a coordinated effort between the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF), ESA and the European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT). • Additionally, ESA is developing several Digital Twin Earth Precursor Activities to study some of the key scientific and technical challenges associated with building a “Digital Twin Earth”. These include forests, hydrology, Antarctica, food systems, oceans, and climate hot spots Digital Twin prototypes. • NASA Earth Science Technology Office (ESTO)’s Advanced Information Systems Technology (AIST) Program has started an initiative in Earth System Digital Twins (ESDT), with 14 current projects in this area, developing various information systems technologies and prototypes that will help prepare the development of future NASA Digital Twins. • CNES is currently developing the concept of a Digital Twin Factory (DTF), which relies on a data lake, a high computing capability using clouds and/or HPC and has thematic algorithms and methodologies able to generate registered and coherent layers of information in order to enrich a datacube from which physical indicators can be computed spatially. NASA, ESA and CNES are also currently defining science use cases that will be presented during the townhall; those and a few short discussions of current projects will serve as a starting point to engage a dialogue about Digital Twins of the Earth with the IGARSS community.

earth science remote sensing; Information systems↗
NASA NTRS2023

LunaNet Position, Navigation, and Timing Services and Signal, Enabling the Future of Lunar Exploration

The International Space Exploration Coordination Group established in 2018 the 3rd edition of the Global Exploration Roadmap (ISECG, 2018) that aims to achieve Mars human surface activities and identifies the exploration of the Moon as a critical intermediate step. A supplement covering updates on surface exploration scenarios was released in 2020 (ISECG, 2020). The Artemis Accords (NASA Artemis, 2020), first signed in October 2020, now includes over two dozen nations, in an agreement on the principles for best practices, including interoperability. September 2022 introduced the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) Moon to Mars Objectives highlighting recurring tenets of collaboration with international and industry partners and interoperability, along with infrastructure objectives for Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT). The successful Artemis 1 mission paved the way to the ambitious plans to establish a sustainable human presence on the Moon. Just a few months after Artemis 1 launch (NASA, 2022), iSpace HAKUTO-R Mission1 (iSpace, 2022) launched, being the first-ever commercial mission, launched by a commercial launch service provider, aiming to land on the lunar surface. The NASA Artemis programme plans initial crewed landings and traverses in 2025, supported by the Lunar Gateway, followed by regular launches to build the lunar systems (NASA Artemis Plan, 2020), (NASA, 2022). NASA’s contracts with Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CLPS, (NASA, n.d.)) to deliver science and technology to the Moon, with launches starting in November 2023. The European Space Agency (ESA) Argonaut (ESA Argonaut, 2022) programme plans to have recurrent missions to bring payloads to the lunar surface, supporting lunar exploration. These are just a few examples of planned missions that will target the Earth’s natural satellite in the next decade, with forecasts of tens of missions per year (NSR, 2022), (Euroconsult, 2020). The large number of missions and the complexity of landing and operating are expected to demand a change of paradigm from the current Earth-based communication and navigation services. In recent years, several agencies have proposed to deploy cislunar communication and navigation services to support lunar missions (NASA LCRNS, 2022), (ESA Moonlight, 2022), (JAXA, 2022)). All these proposals seek to deploy service-providing satellites in lunar orbit to ease the user missions’ operations. The PNT services objective is to support all types of lunar users (e.g.: orbiters, landers, ascent vehicles, and surface crew and rovers). At the same time, NASA and ESA initiated an effort to define a common framework to ensure interoperability among different service providers: the LunaNet framework. The LunaNet Interoperability Specification (NASA and ESA, 2023) covers communication, PNT, and auxiliary services, by establishing a common set of requirements to ensure interoperability. This conference contribution will present the LunaNet PNT services, focusing on the Lunar Augmented Navigation Service (LANS) that resembles the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) concept on Earth: constellations of satellites broadcasting a radio navigation signal synchronized to a common reference clock, with augmentations to accommodate users’ needs in an environment away from Earth. This includes a description of the high-level LANS concept and the basic principles defined to ensure interoperability. In addition, it will describe the common S-band PNT Augmented Forward Signal (AFS) and common messages to be adopted for compliance with the LunaNet framework, and the justification of the selected approach.

LunaNet↗
NASA NTRS2023

Lunanet Position, Navigation, and Timing Services and Signals, Enabling the Future of Lunar Exploration

The International Space Exploration Coordination Group established in 2018 the 3rd edition of the Global Exploration Roadmap (ISECG, 2018) that aims to achieve Mars human surface activities and identifies the exploration of the Moon as a critical intermediate step. A supplement covering updates on surface exploration scenarios was released in 2020 (ISECG, 2020). The Artemis Accords (NASA Artemis, 2020), first signed in October 2020, now includes over two dozen nations, in an agreement on the principles for best practices, including interoperability. In September 2022 the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) introduced the Moon to Mars Objectives highlighting recurring tenets of collaboration with international and industry partners and interoperability, along with infrastructure objectives for Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT). The successful Artemis 1 mission paved the way to the ambitious plans to establish a sustainable human presence on the Moon. Just a few months after Artemis 1 launch (NASA, 2022), iSpace HAKUTO-R Mission1 (iSpace, 2022) launched, being the first-ever mission launched by a commercial launch service provider aiming to land on the lunar surface. The NASA Artemis program plans initial crewed landings and surface traverses in 2025, supported by the Lunar Gateway. Regular launches will follow to build the lunar systems for a sustained presence as presented in the Artemis Plan (NASA Artemis Plan, 2020), (NASA, 2022). NASA’s contracts with commercial providers through the Commercial Lunar Payload Services program (CLPS, (NASA, n.d.)) will deliver science and technology demonstration missions to the Moon starting in November 2023. The European Space Agency (ESA) Argonaut (ESA Argonaut, 2022) program plans to have recurrent missions to bring payloads to the lunar surface, supporting lunar exploration. These are just a few examples of planned missions that will target Earth’s natural satellite in the next decade, with forecasts of tens of missions per year (NSR, 2022), (Euroconsult, 2020). The large number of missions and the complexity of landing and operating are expected to demand a change of paradigm from the current Earth-based communication and navigation services, that may be combined with onboard sensors. In recent years, several agencies have proposed to deploy cislunar communication and navigation services to support lunar missions (NASA LCRNS, 2022), (ESA Moonlight, 2022), (JAXA, 2022)). All these proposals seek to deploy service-providing satellites in lunar orbit to ease the user missions’ operations. The PNT services objective is to support all types of lunar users (e.g.: orbiters, landers, ascent vehicles, surface crew, rovers, and deployed science payloads). At the same time, NASA and ESA initiated an effort to define a common framework to ensure interoperability among different service providers: the LunaNet framework. The LunaNet Interoperability Specification (NASA and ESA, 2023) covers communication, PNT, and auxiliary services, by establishing a common set of requirements to ensure interoperability. This conference contribution will present the LunaNet PNT services, focusing on the Lunar Augmented Navigation Service (LANS) that would be provided by a system that resembles the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) concept on Earth: constellations of satellites broadcasting a radio navigation signal synchronized to a common reference clock, with augmentations to accommodate users’ needs in an environment away from Earth. This paper includes a description of the high-level LANS concept, and the basic principles defined to ensure interoperability. In addition, it will describe the common S-band PNT Augmented Forward Signal (AFS) and common messages to be adopted for compliance with the LunaNet framework, and the justification of the selected approach.

LunaNet↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Performance Testing of TRL4-6 LISA Laser System

The Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) is an ESA-led future mission to measure gravitational waves from astronomical sources in space. LISA has been adopted as a formal mission by ESA in January 2024, and is expected to become a formal project at NASA within 2024. The laser system (LS), which includes four laser heads (LH) each containing a laser optical module (LOM) and laser electronics module (LEM), a frequency reference system (FRS, optical frequency reference) and four power monitor detectors (PMON), is one of the three U.S. contributions to LISA from NASA. The Lasers and Electro-Optics Branch at NASA GSFC has been developing and managing the design of the LISA LS. Currently, the TRL (technology readiness level) of the NASA LISA laser system is transitioning from 4 to 6. TRL 4/5 LISA LOM was sent to ESA in early 2023 and has undergone optical performance testing. [1] By late summer of 2024, NASA plans to deliver the TRL 6 LOM to ESA for performance evaluation. Since the delivery of the TRL4/5 LOM to ESA, we have taken steps to advance the TRL of the overall LS and have also started end-to-end system level testing involving other subsystems. They include 1) optical performance test of TRL6 LOM and TRL 5 LEM under thermal cycling, 2) end-to-end test of the laser head (LH) and the GSE (ground support equipment) FRS, driven by TRL 4 FRS electronics (FRS-E) provided by Ball Aerospace, 3) end-to-end test of the laser head (LH) with the GSE phase meter system (PMS) provided by Albert Einstein Institute, and 4) optical performance test of the LH with the PMON subsystem developed by NASA. The FRS, PMS, and PMON provide necessary frequency stability, relative phase stability between lasers, and output power stability, respectively. Since they are all vital for the sensitive laser interferometry performed in LISA, it is necessary to perform these system level testing by combining the LH and other subsystems, and to prove the optical performance at an early stage during the LS development. Our recent work has successfully demonstrated the intra-connectivity of the LS, as well as critical external interface with the PMS to meet the LISA’s performance requirements. In this talk, we will report on the latest status of the LH testing and system level test. We will also discuss the paths to bring each subsystem to TRL6+ and plans for future system level testing.

LISA↗