Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “navigation”

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 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Artemis Navigation Architecture: Early Capabilities and Long Term Evolvability and Evolution

With the awarding of multiple contracts within the Artemis program and building on the success of Artemis I, NASA is investing in and demonstrating the vehicle capabilities necessary for a return to human crewed Lunar Missions. To support activities on the lunar surface, NASA is also assessing architecture options and approaches to enable high precision in-situ navigation within the lunar sphere of influence. These capabilities build on decades of research and advancements within the field, building and evolving the techniques used during Apollo. To support inter-operability and broad application within its elements, NASA conducted a trade on Orbital and Surface Lunar Architecture for PNT. Time-defined mission requirements were captured across elements to inform a phased approach and deployment of needed capability. The architecture must also address unique aspects of the South Pole lunar environments, specifically in terms of harsh lighting and hazardous terrain. To inform the study, documentation of primary users, operational concepts of operations, driving scenarios, and mission needs were used to define performance constraints and phasing. Multiple technologies were assessed in terms of maturity, applicability, and performance to meet the primary user needs forecast. The results of this study support the utilization of in-situ orbital infrastructure to provide a back-bone for navigation and emphasize the need for a common Lunar Reference System and Lunar Time Reference. This deployment can ensure compatibility and enable a high-accuracy in-situ capability. This provides further justification for the capabilities being invested in and deployed by NASA and other international agencies. In addition to including advancements in terrestrial surface navigation, NASA is also applying lessons learned and innovation in the contractual approach to the individual elements by means of a services-based contract mechanism. This impacts the navigation architecture heavily in terms of government and provider roles, in terms of levels of implementation, interoperability, and verification. These distinctions in roles provide constraints to the architecture approach in terms of implementation and integration and will be discussed. The development, use, and mandate of interoperability standards are being deployed to support cross-element compatibility. This paper will provide a summary of the NASA Lunar Navigation needs across its various elements and the proposed deployment of an integrated navigation architecture to support early mission needs with inherent extensibility towards the future.

Evan Anzalone↗
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 NTRSDate not supplied

Lunar Node – 1: Initial Flight Results and the Role of Surface Psuedolites in Lunar Navigation

On February 22, 2024, the Intuitive Machines IM-1 NOVA-C lander, nick-named Odysseus, landed on the lunar surface, carrying with it a cadre of NASA scientific and technology demonstration payloads. These payloads and missions marked the first delivery of NASA instruments to operate from the lunar surface since the Apollo landings. One of these payloads is Lunar Node -1 (LN-1), a navigation beacon demonstration mission. The payload was designed and built by NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center. The payload’s main goal was to demonstrate and provide insight into the use of lunar surface-based radio navigation aids. As part of the mission, LN-1 successfully conducted multiple one-way transmissions from the NOVA-C vehicle to Deep Space Network ground receivers using its onboard S-band transmitter, while being disciplined by an onboard Space Chip Scale Atomic Clock. LN-1 transmitted to DSN on an almost daily basis during transit to the moon, including two surface passes. The payload was originally plan to conduct 7-10 days of surface operation as an always-on beacon. These passes focused on evaluating two main navigation approaches: performance and stability of ranging using time-based transfer techniques on a cubesat size and grade platform, as well as one-way psuedonoise ranging approaches. To assess performance, the measurements were compared to independent navigation solutions using multiple approaches including: one-way Doppler tracking, two-way Doppler Tracking, and visual verification of the landing location provided by visual observations from orbital platforms. While the mission only conducted limited surface operations, the data provides some initial insight to performance form the lunar surface. These results are compared with initial ground-based testing as well as continued evaluation of the flight-space platform using multiple grades of oscillators for maintaining clock and frequency stability. These focus on the timing stability of platform in a deep-space environment as well variations in state determination. Given these insights, this paper provides additional description and evaluation of how this approach can be utilized as part of a broader lunar navigation architecture, such as being developed and deployed across multiple international space agencies. Analysis is provided to develop overall timing requirements and assessment of operational scenarios, such as orbit and surface location determination. In addition, the results support discussion as to how surface pseudolites could best be used within existing standard signal definitions, such as defined in the LunaNet Interoperability Specifications. This will consider concerns such as the near-/far- problem as well as operational considerations, including whether a beacon is better suited as two- or one-way ranging platform. The use cases are focused on how these psuedolites can provide additional coverage to augment and support planned operational coverage. For example, this analysis provides analysis of mid-latitude surface missions, where there may be limited geometry and availability of orbital relays. The results will show how these navigation psuedolites can fit within the developing architecture to provide additional robustness, capability, and support multiple use cases. Lastly, the paper will discuss challenges and next steps to be addressed in the implementation and testing of a follow-on payload and a continued path towards demonstration and integration of this capability into Lunar PNT architectures.

Evan Anzalone↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lunar Node – 1: Initial Flight Results and the Role of Surface Psuedolites in Lunar Navigation

On February 22, 2024, Intuitive Machines NOVA-C lander, nick-named Odysseus, landed on the lunar surface, carrying with it a cadre of NASA scientific and technology demonstration payloads. These payloads and missions marked the first delivery of NASA instruments to operate from the lunar surface since the Apollo landings. One of these payloads is Lunar Node -1 (LN-1), a navigation beacon demonstration mission. The payload was designed and built by NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center. The payload’s main goal was to demonstrate and provide insight into the use of lunar surface-based radio navigation aids. As part of the mission, LN-1 successfully conducted multiple one-way transmissions from the NOVA-C vehicle to Deep Space Network ground receivers using its onboard S-band transmitter, while being disciplined by an onboard Space Chip Scale Atomic Clock. LN-1 transmitted to DSN on an almost daily basis during transit to the moon, including two surface passes. The payload was originally plan to conduct 7-10 days of surface operation as an always-on beacon. These passes focused on evaluating two main navigation approaches: performance and stability of ranging using time-based transfer techniques on a cubesat size and grade platform, as well as one-way psuedonoise ranging approaches. To assess performance, the measurements were compared to independent navigation solutions using multiple approaches including: one-way Doppler tracking, two-way Doppler Tracking, and visual verification of the landing location provided by visual observations from orbital platforms. While the mission only conducted limited surface operations, the data provides some initial insight to performance form the lunar surface. These results are compared with initial ground-based testing as well as continued evaluation of the flight-space platform using multiple grades of oscillators for maintaining clock and frequency stability. These focus on the timing stability of platform in a deep-space environment as well variations in state determination. Given these insights, this paper provides additional description and evaluation of how this approach can be utilized as part of a broader lunar navigation architecture, such as being developed and deployed across multiple international space agencies. Analysis is provided to develop overall timing requirements and assessment of operational scenarios, such as orbit and surface location determination. In addition, the results support discussion as to how surface pseudolites could best be used within existing standard signal definitions, such as defined in the LunaNet Interoperability Specifications. This will consider concerns such as the near-/far- problem as well as operational considerations, including whether a beacon is better suited as two- or one-way ranging platform. The use cases are focused on how these psuedolites can provide additional coverage to augment and support planned operational coverage. For example, this analysis provides analysis of mid-latitude surface missions, where there may be limited geometry and availability of orbital relays. The results will show how these navigation psuedolites can fit within the developing architecture to provide additional robustness, capability, and support multiple use cases. Lastly, the paper will discuss challenges and next steps to be addressed in the implementation and testing of a follow-on payload and a continued path towards demonstration and integration of this capability into Lunar PNT architectures.

Evan J Anzalone↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Survey of Autonomous Navigation Techniques Applicable to Lunar Surface Exploration

As humanity returns to the Moon, and more and more attention is being paid to lunar surface operations, there is a greater need than ever for methods of surface navigation. These could be methods of computer-assisted orienteering for astronauts exploring on foot during an Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA), or methods of solving the Lost-on-the-Moon problem to initialize a crewed or autonomous rover’s state estimate. It may also be necessary to process navigation data associated with surface samples or other surface operations a posteriori to better understand where that analysis occurred. Autonomous rover operation will also require Hazard Detection and Avoidance (HDA) and terrain-aware pathfinding. While navigation on the surface of the Moon will likely rely on Earth-based assets such as the Deep Space Network (DSN) or communication with other spacecraft (e.g., LunaNet, LCRNS, pre-deployed moon beacons, a nearby lander) it may be necessary to navigate in a loss-of-communication scenario. This paper analyzes the methods of surface navigation used on other celestial bodies, such as those used during the Apollo missions and autonomous exploration of Mars, as well as novel methods which have been studied but not yet implemented which may prove useful. It is shown that the navigator has myriad options when processing data from an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU), a star tracker, (rover) wheel encoders, optical cameras, and LIght Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) sensors. The intention of this paper is to provide a broad overview of what has been done and what could be done, to aid those designing vehicles and/or missions to the lunar surface.

Paul D Mckee↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Survey of Autonomous Navigation Techniques Applicable to Lunar Surface Exploration

As humanity returns to the Moon, and more and more attention is being paid to lunar surface operations, there is a greater need than ever for methods of surface navigation. These could be methods of computer-assisted orienteering for astronauts exploring on foot during an Extra-Vehicular Activity (EVA), or methods of solving the Lost-on-the-Moon problem to initialize a crewed or autonomous rover’s state estimate. It may also be necessary to process navigation data associated with surface samples or other surface operations a posteriori to better understand where that analysis occurred. Autonomous rover operation will also require Hazard Detection and Avoidance (HDA) and terrain-aware pathfinding. While navigation on the surface of the Moon will likely rely on Earth-based assets such as the Deep Space Network (DSN) or communication with other spacecraft (e.g., LunaNet, LCRNS, pre-deployed moon beacons, a nearby lander) it may be necessary to navigate in a loss-of-communication scenario. This paper analyzes the methods of surface navigation used on other celestial bodies, such as those used during the Apollo missions and autonomous exploration of Mars, as well as novel methods which have been studied but not yet implemented which may prove useful. It is shown that the navigator has myriad options when processing data from an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU), a star tracker, (rover) wheel encoders, optical cameras, and LIght Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) sensors. The intention of this paper is to provide a broad overview of what has been done and what could be done, to aid those designing vehicles and/or missions to the lunar surface.

Paul McKee↗
NASA NTRS2011

Small Body Landing Accuracy Using In-Situ Navigation

Spacecraft landings on small bodies (asteroids and comets) can require target accuracies too stringent to be met using ground-based navigation alone, especially if specific landing site requirements must be met for safety or to meet science goals. In-situ optical observations coupled with onboard navigation processing can meet the tighter accuracy requirements to enable such missions. Recent developments in deep space navigation capability include a self-contained autonomous navigation system (used in flight on three missions) and a landmark tracking system (used experimentally on the Japanese Hayabusa mission). The merging of these two technologies forms a methodology to perform autonomous onboard navigation around small bodies. This paper presents an overview of these systems, as well as the results from Monte Carlo studies to quantify the achievable landing accuracies by using these methods. Sensitivity of the results to variations in spacecraft maneuver execution error, attitude control accuracy and unmodeled forces are examined. Cases for two bodies, a small asteroid and on a mid-size comet, are presented.

in-situ navigation↗
NASA NTRS2001

Navigation and Mission Analysis Software for the Next Generation of JPL Missions

MONTE (Mission analysis, Operations, and Navigation Toolkit Environment) is a new software system being developed to replace the navigation and trajectory analysis software currently in use at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). MONTE will reproduce the existing functionality of the legacy systems and add significant new capabilities for the MONTE users - the mission and navigation analysts in the Navigation and Mission Design Section (Section 312). MONTE will be developed as a single tightly integrated system, in contrast to the multiple disparate software suites currently in use. MONTE is being designed to facilitate a variety of navigation and trajectory tasks in a broad range of contexts, including research and development, analysis and design, and operations.

MONTE (Mission analysis, Operations, and Navigatio↗
NASA NTRS2016

Use and Protection of GPS Sidelobe Signals for Enhanced Navigation Performance in High Earth Orbit

The application of the Global Positioning System (GPS) for navigation of spacecraft in High and Geosynchronous Earth Orbit (HEO/GEO) has crossed a threshold and is now being employed in operational missions. Utilizing advanced GPS receivers optimized for these missions, space users have made extensive use of the sidelobe transmissions from the GPS satellites to realize navigation performance that far exceeds that predicted by pre-launch simulations. Unfortunately, the official specification for the GPS Space Service Volume (SSV), developed in 2006, assumes that only signals emanating from the main beam of the GPS transmit antenna are useful for navigation, which greatly under-estimates the number of signals available for navigation purposes. As a result, future high-altitude space users may be vulnerable to any GPS design changes that suppress the sidelobe transmissions, beginning with Block III space vehicles (SVs) 11-32. This paper presents proposed changes to the GPS system SSV requirements, as informed by data from recent experiments in the SSV and new mission applications that are enabled by GPS navigation in HEO/GEO regimes. The NASA/NOAA GOES-R series satellites are highlighted as an example of a mission that relies on this currently-unspecified GPS system performance to meet mission requirements.

Navigation↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

New Optical Navigation Results Using Historical MESSENGER Data

This paper describes new optical navigation (OpNav) results obtained by processing previously collected measurements from the MESSENGER mission to Mercury. This project also serves to mature the tools and capabilities of NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) in OpNav, using the open source Goddard Image Analysis and Navigation Tool (GIANT). New navigation measurements are obtained during the Mercury flyby and orbital phases, using OpNav measurements generated by GIANT, and these measurements are compared to predictions. The results obtained provide a set of improvements to be made in navigation tools and will pave the way for future missions to navigate near terrestrial bodies using optical measurements.

Optical Navigation↗
NASA NTRS2004

Mars Exploration Rovers navigation results

The twin Mars Exploration Rovers, Spirit and Opportunity, were launched on June 10, 2003, and July 8, 2003, from Cape Canaveral, Florida. Spirit and Opportunity were targeted for landings at Gusev Crater (arrival on January 4, 2004) and Meridiani Planum (arrival on January 25, 2004). The primary navigation challenge was to deliver each spacecraft to the desired atmospheric entry interface point with sufficient accuracy such that each lander would touch down within a specified landing ellipse (about 70 km x 5 km) determined to be safe for landing and also judged to be scientifically interesting. In order to achieve landing within the target ellipse, precise control of the inertial entry flight path angle (FPA) at atmospheric entry was required. The maximum allowable errors in FPA following TCM-5 (trajectory correction maneuver #5) at Entry (E) -2 days were +/-0.12 deg(3 sigma) for Spirit and +/-0.14 deg(3 sigma) for Opportunity. Achieving these entry delivery accuracies necessitated significant improvements to the interplanetary navigation system used for MER. These improvements included new processes and software for orbit determination, propulsive maneuver design, and entry, descent, and landing (EDL) trajectory simulation. The actual achieved atmospheric entry accuracies for Spirit and Opportunity significantly exceeded the requirements. At the navigation data cutoff for the TCM-5 final design, the orbit determination FPA knowledge error was 0.028 deg(3 sigma) for Spirit and 0.035 deg(3 sigma) for Opportunity. Because of exceptionally accurate navigation performance, TCM-5 (E - 2 days) and TCM-6 (E - 4 hours) were canceled for both Spirit and Opportunity. The actual landing locations (determined from in-situ Doppler tracking between the MER rovers and the Mars Odyssey orbiter) differed from the target landing points by 10.1 km (downtrack) for Spirit and 24.6 km (downtrack) for Opportunity. The majority of the landing position offsets for both landers was primarily caused by variations in atmosphere and spacecraft aerodynamic modeling from what was predicted. The amount of the landing position offset caused by navigation-only errors was only 3.3 km (uptrack) for Spirit and 9.7 km (downtrack) for Opportunity.

Mars Exploration Rover (MER)↗
NASA NTRS2014

Station Explorer for X-Ray Timing and Navigation Technology Architecture Overview

The Station Explorer for X-ray Timing and Navigation Technology (SEXTANT) is a technology demonstration enhancement to the Neutron-star Interior Composition Explorer (NICER) mission. NICER is a NASA astrophysics Explorer Mission of Opportunity, scheduled for launch in mid-2016, that will be hosted on the International Space Station (ISS) via the ExPRESS Logistics Carrier (ELC). By exploiting the regular pulsations emit-ted by the ultra dense remnants of dead stars, which rotate many hundreds of times per second, SEXTANT will, for the first-time, demonstrate real-time, on-board X-ray pulsar-based navigation is a significant milestone in the quest to establish a GPS-like navigation capability available throughout our Solar System and beyond and include the worlds first completely functional system architecture for navigation using X-ray pulsars. In addition, NICER SEXTANT will investigate the suit-ability of these millisecond X-ray pulsars (MSPs) as a Solar System-wide timing infrastructure to rival terrestrial atomic clocks on long timescales. This paper provides a brief overview of the SEXTANT demonstration and the design of the system architecture that consists of the NICER X-ray timing instrument, the SEXTANT flight software and algorithms, supporting ground system, and the GSFC X-ray Navigation Laboratory Testbed (GXLT).

Pulsars↗
NASA NTRS2012

Optical Navigation for the Dawn Mission at Vesta

The Dawn S/C was launched in September 2007 in order to perform remote sensing observations of the asteroids Vesta and Ceres. Dawn entered into orbit about Vesta in July 2011, completed successfully the mission goals, that were carried out in four different science orbits, by August 2012 and has since departed towards asteroid Ceres. An important component of the Dawn navigation was optical navigation, which was performed at almost all mission phases.Optical data types were used in the overall orbit determination process. In addition they were used to determine some key aspects of the asteroid's physical characteristics, such as the rotational axis, shape and surface morphology and gravity terms. In this paper we present an overview of the optical navigation operations at Vesta, the optical navigation planning, image acquisition strategy, data reduction methodology, and the up-to-date post operations assessment. Of particular importance is the extensive use of landmark navigation, which was performed for the first time for real-time support of operations and which comprised the bulk of the optical data processing.

orbital operations↗
NASA NTRS2013

Supporting Crewed Lunar Exploration with LiAISON Navigation

This paper examines the benefits of navigating a crewed vehicle between the Earth and the Moon using both ground tracking and satellite-to-satellite tracking. Linked Autonomous Interplanetary Satellite Orbit Navigation (LiAISON) is a new technique that has been shown to dramatically improve the navigation of lunar satellites, libration orbiters, and Earth orbiting satellites using scalar intersatellite observations. In this paper, LiAISON is applied to the problem of navigating a crewed vehicle to the Moon. It has been found that LiAISON observations improve the navigation accuracy enough to reduce the number of active ground tracking stations from six to three.

low-energy↗
NASA NTRS2024

StarNAV: An Architecture for Autonomous Spacecraft Navigation by the Relativistic Perturbation of Starlight

Exploration missions to the outer Solar System (e.g., Neptune, Kuiper belt objects) or to the interstellar medium present several challenges for conventional spacecraft designs. One of the greatest challenges is a means for navigation, as Earth-based tracking with the Deep Space Network (DSN) becomes less desirable due to high cost, decreased performance at long ranges, and long light-time delays. Indeed, light time delays at Neptune are over four hours (one way), making control of spacecraft during critical events nearly impossible—and this problem only becomes worse as we move to the Kuiper belt or to interstellar space. The need for autonomous spacecraft navigation is well established and is prominently featured in the 2015 NASA Technology Roadmap (e.g., TA 5.4.2.6 & 5.4.2.8). This has led to investment in various technologies to accomplish this task, with the majority of recent work focusing on optical navigation (OPNAV; TA 5.4.4.1) [1], X-ray pulsar navigation (XNAV; TA 5.6.1) [2], or DSN one-way ranging with the Deep Space Atomic Clock (DSAC; TA 5.4.1.1) [3]. This NIAC study suggests a new (and completely different) way of autonomously navigating a spacecraft anywhere in the Solar System or beyond. We call this new technique StarNAV.

NIAC Phase I↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Onboard Navigation Error Analysis for Aerocapture at Uranus

Capturing into an orbit around Uranus using aerocapture allows one to design a mission with faster interplanetary trajectories and less propellant requirements. Such an aerocapture mission would rely on the onboard Guidance, Navigation, and Control (GNC) subsystems to successfully capture into an orbit around Uranus. Uncertainty in the state information and the noise in the sensor measurements induce navigation errors in the guidance and control subsystems, which can affect the overall performance of the aerocapture mission at Uranus. Understanding the effect of these navigation errors on mission performance is essential. To this end, this work considers different sensors with varying quality to understand their impact on the overall mission performance. In addition, this paper studies the impact of the uncertainty in the initial states used to initialize the onboard navigation filter and understands their effect on mission performance. This paper also shows the onboard navigation errors obtained from the Linear Covariance (LinCov) analysis and uses them for verification and validation (V\&V) of the results from Program to Optimize and Simulate Trajectories-II (POST2).

Aerocapture↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Reinforcement Learning for Spacecraft Navigation & Environment Characterization in the Planar-Restricted Two-Body Problem

As science, exploration, and commercial space missions become increasingly complex, so does the need for efficient, autonomous, and integrated spacecraft navigation and operations techniques. Key operational functions, including data collection and transmission, environment characterization, systems constraints, human factors, and navigation, often are intertwined and conflicted. Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) offers a framework for addressing integrated spacecraft navigation and planning in an uncertain dynamical environment. The goal of this study is to evaluate the utility of DRL for integrated spacecraft navigation and planning. This is achieved by developing a simple environmental characterization training environment in the Planar-Restricted 2-Body Problem (PR2BP), establishing benchmarks and heuristic baselines, and designing a previously unstudied Markov Decision Process (MDP) formulation. This MDP formulation enables the spacecraft DRL agents to appropriately balance navigation and actuation capabilities. The resulting DRL-derived policy exceeds a random or untrained policy and meets or exceeds the level of performance of a heuristic without actuation. In the process, valuable intuition is gained about the problem with insight into how DRL methods could scale to increasingly more realistic scenarios, including net-work design and training architectures, efficient state space representations, and methods for encouraging exploration in a parametric action space, among others.

navigation↗
NASA NTRS1969

Guidance and navigation requirements for unmanned flyby and swingby missions to the outer planets. Volume 2: impulsive high thrust missions, phase A

The impulsive, high thrust missions portion of a study on guidance and navigation requirements for unmanned flyby and swingby missions to the outer planet is presented. The proper balance between groundbased navigational capability, using the deep space network (DSN) alone, and an onboard navigational capability with and without supplemental use of DSN tracking, for unmanned missions to the outer planets of the solar system is defined. A general guidance and navigation requirements program is used to survey parametrically the characteristics associated with three types of navigation systems: (1) totally onboard, (2) totally Earth-based, and (3) a combination of these two.

Source record↗