SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
European space related research and development from the launch of Sputnik in 1957 to 1980 in discussed. The political response to Sputnik is analyzed in the context of cold war. The development of the European Space Agency is traced.
Current developments in space activities increasingly involve the presence of humans on board spacecraft and, in the near future, on the Moon, on Mars, on board Space Stations, etc. With respect to these challenges, the political and legal issues connected to the status of astronauts are largely unclear and require a new doctrinal attention. In the same way, many legal and political questions remain open in the structure of future space crews: the need for international standards in the definition and training of astronauts, etc.; but, first of all, an international uniform legal definition of astronauts. Moreover, the legal structure for human life and operations in outer space can be a new and relevant paradigm for the definition of similar rules in all the situations and environments in which humans are involved in extreme frontiers. The present article starts from an overview on the existing legal and political definitions of 'astronauts', moving to the search of a more useful definition. This is followed by an analysis of the concrete problems created by human space activities, and the legal and political responses to them (the need for a code of conduct; the structure of the crew and the existing rules in the US and ex-USSR; the new legal theories on the argument; the definition and structure of a code of conduct; the next legal problems in fields such as privacy law, communications law, business law, criminal law, etc.).
On February 1, 2010, the federal budget for Fiscal Year 2011 was released. NASA received an increase, unlike almost any other federal agency. At the same time, the budget revealed that the Constellation Program would be cancelled and that NASA would look to private sector providers for transportation of cargo, and eventually crew members, to the International Space Station. The Constellation Program had included a human return to the Moon by the year 2020, and the program plans called for a permanent surface facility capable of supporting human explorers. In the FY2011 announcement, the prescription of a lunar objective was replaced by a concept called flexible path that was advertised to open possibilities of other types of human missions beyond low Earth orbit. The policy direction has polarized the U.S. space community, where the reactions have been swift and polemical. The new policy has been described both as the death knell of human space exploration and as the only hope to save human space exploration. Some members of Congress have threatened legal action based on the current law regarding appropriation of funds to NASA, which states that Constellation cannot be cancelled without prior consultation with Congress. As might be expected, some of the reaction is directly related to losses or gains of jobs in districts associated with NASA facilities. However, various statements show high emotional content, suggesting that personal belief systems have been challenged. Meanwhile, many details of the new policy are not yet clear; and some aspects seem to be shifting in response to political reaction. The final direction for NASA will not be known until the FY2011 budget has been passed by Congress and signed by the President. I will draw upon my 28 years of studying, writing, and speaking on the topic of future human exploration beyond low Earth orbit to discuss the various issues at stake and the historical context for the debate. My own work has had a central theme of lunar exploration and development, but I have also come to believe that human exploration will never be more than a political sideshow until a significant economic sector can be created in space off of the Earth. Disclaimer: The views presented will be my own and in no way reflect official policies of the NASA.
Systemic risk is the name given to impacts that spread within and across systems and sectors (e.g. ecosystems, health, infrastructure and the food sector) via the movements of people, goods, capital and information within and across boundaries (e.g. regions, countries and continents). The spread of these impacts can lead to potentially existential consequences and system collapse across a range of time horizons. Globalization contributes to systemic risk affecting people worldwide. The impacts of climate change or COVID-19 show how the challenges of addressing systemic risk go beyond conventional risk management and governance. Critical system interdependencies, amplified by underlying vulnerabilities, highlight that there is a growing need to better understand cascading impacts, systemic risks and the possible political (governance) and societal responses. This includes improving our understanding of the root causes of systemic risk, both biophysical and socio-economic, and related information needs. Addressing contemporary challenges in terms of systemic risk requires integrating different systems perspectives and fostering system thinking, while implementing key intergovernmental agendas, such as the Paris Agreement, the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction and the Sustainable Development Goals.
There have been a number of studies done in the past drawn on lessons learned with regard to human loss-of-life events. Generally, the systemic causes and proximate causes for fatal events have both been examined in considerable detail. However, an examination of near-fatal accidents and failures that narrowly missed being fatal could be equally useful, not only in detecting causes, both proximate and systemic, but also for determining what factors averted disaster, what design decisions and/or operator actions prevented catastrophe. Additionally, review of risk factors for upcoming or future programs will often look at trending statistics, generally focusing on failure/success statistics. Unfortunately, doing so can give a skewed or misleading view of past reliability or a reliability that cannot be presumed to apply to a new program. One reason for this might be that failure/success criteria aren't the same across programs, but also that apparent success can hide systemic faults that, under other circumstances, can be fatal to a program with different parameters. A program with a number of near misses can look more reliable than a consistently healthy program with a single out-of-family failure and provide very misleading data if it is not examined in detail. This is particularly true for a manned space program where failure/success includes more than making a particular orbit. Augmenting reliability evaluations with this near miss data can provide insight and expand on the limitations of a strictly pass/fail evaluation. Even more importantly, a thorough understanding of these near miss events can identify conditions that prevented fatalities. Those conditions may be key to a programs reliability, but, without insight to the repercussions if such conditions were not in place, their importance may not be readily clear. As programs mature and political and fiscal responsibilities come to the fore, often there is considerable incentive to eliminate unnecessary conservatism, design margin, redundancy, operational support, testing, training, or safety oversight. An evaluation that demonstrates how these features and capabilities averted disaster can ensure processes that saved lives or missions are not discarded without appropriate review and understanding. Close examination of accidents that almost were can also highlight differences in design from one program to another, either justifying reliability comparisons or negating them. It can also provide considerable insight into how those saving factors were developed and implemented so that similar methods can be used to ensure appropriate life-saving and mission saving factors can be developed, even for a dissimilar space program. The lessons are appropriate for seasoned manned space programs and agencies, but crucial for untried agencies and organizations that are interested in sending man into space. The large body of publicly available near miss and accident data available provide invaluable insight into programmatic, technical, and even political issues that can be addressed before they impact safety. In this paper, we examine a number of these near misses and accidents and steps a program, agency, or potential spacefaring company might take to improve their chances of success and avoid mission or safety disasters using this data.
NASA is a household name in this day and age, known commonly as America's government-run powerhouse of innovation and space exploration. It is a common dream for students to be a part of NASA's workforce, but I did not realize that it was my dream until I found that I could not imagine working anywhere else. From August to December, I had the privilege of a co-op tour with NASA at the Johnson Space Center. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) first formed in the early hysteria of the Cold War, and in its early days it received enormous funding and political support. It was America's response to the Russian Sputnik, which was a not only a stark symbol of what was suddenly possible, but also of how far behind the United States had fallen in the race for technology. The political atmosphere in the world has since changed, but NASA's drive to push the boundaries of the impossible has not faded: NASA's primary mission has been exploration for the betterment of mankind, and it works towards that mission to this day. The specific NASA site that I worked in was by a coast near Houston, TX, at the Johnson Space Center (Figure 1). I was led on my first day of work to a building dedicated to Structural Engineering (Building 13), which was where I would be spending most of my time in the months to come. It was here that I had my desk and cubicle, and would later do the bulk of my computer modeling and theoretical planning. Later that day we traveled to the Vibrations and Acoustics Test Facility (Building 49), and here I was shown the parts we would use for our technical project and the locations we would work in. I worked in the Loads and Dynamics Branch of the Structural Engineering Division, in the Engineering Directorate.
A simplified model of a pointing control system for balloon-borne solar experiments is chosen. Equations of motion for this model are derived and a feedback control law is defined. A digital computer simulation of the system is developed. Simulation results show favorable system response characteristics.
The merger of academic, industrial, and political forces in the United States after the launching of Sputnik 1 is described. The decisions and governmental policies that lead to the formation of NASA are summarized. The question of whether NASA would be a military of civilian operation is discussed and the importance of the decision to have NASA as a civilian organization is emphasized.
The International Space Station (ISS) is a multinational orbiting space laboratory that is built in cooperation with 16 nations. The design and sustaining engineering expertise is spread worldwide. As the number of Partners with orbiting elements on the ISS grows, the challenge NASA is facing as the ISS integrator is to ensure that engineering expertise and data are accessible in a timely fashion to ensure ongoing operations and mission success. Integrating international engineering teams requires definition and agreement on common processes and responsibilities, joint training and the emergence of a unique engineering team culture. ISS engineers face daunting logistical and political challenges regarding data sharing requirements. To assure systematic information sharing and anomaly resolution of integrated anomalies, the ISS Partners are developing multi-lateral engineering interface procedures. Data sharing and individual responsibility are key aspects of this plan. This paper describes several examples of successful multilateral anomaly resolution. These successes were used to form the framework of the Partner to Partner engineering interface procedures, and this paper describes those currently documented multilateral engineering processes. Furthermore, it addresses the challenges experienced to date, and the forward work expected in establishing a successful working relationship with Partners as their hardware is launched.
Demand models for air transportation that are sensitive to the impact of changing technology were developed. The models are responsive to potential changes in technology, and to changing economic, social, and political factors as well. In addition to anticipating the wide differences in the factors influencing the demand for long haul and short haul air travel, the models were designed to clearly distinguish among the unique features of these markets.
The Advanced Concepts Office (ACO) at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC)has been performing conceptual design of launch vehicles since the Space Transportation System Program. As part of its duties ACO has been tasked with investigating the effects of known and potential threats and opportunities to a myriad of launch vehicle concepts, launch sites, and mission profiles known as the launch space. As the launch space becomes more crowded and busy with launch providers and their vehicles, the legacy method of prescribing each design discipline to a single human Subject Matter Expert (SME) has become infeasible. Rapidly changing launch, economical, and political constraints require rapid evaluation of their effects. While moving into this future of rapid response does require streamlining of data and processes, it does not however lead directly to reinventing the wheel. Flight-validated analysis tools, procedures, and lessons learned can be effectively leveraged to bring the experience from decades of government and commercial flight programs to the new paradigm. In this publication we describe the aggregation of all previous launch vehicle design efforts of ACO into an automated and integrated toolchain called menagerie. The toolchain utilizes a suite of NASA, Air Force Research Lab (AFRL), and ACO-developed tools and processes to evaluate launch vehicle concepts, mission profiles, and trades in a fraction of the time previously required.
In section 5, item 1 of this article it is stated that: A recent shift in decision-making authority from the politically appointed Board of Game to the Subsistence Division of the Alaska Department of Fish and Game should make these decisions about hunting regulations more responsive to local observations and needs. We now recognize that this shift in regulatory authority to ADF&G never occurred. We hereby correct this error so that wildlife users in Alaska do not come to ADF&G with expectations that this agency has authority to adjust hunting regulations to accommodate climate change.
Humanitarian assistance to developing countries has long focused on countries that have political, economic and strategic interest to the United States. Recent changes in global security concerns have heightened the perception that humanitarian action is becoming increasingly politicized. This is seen to be largely driven by the 'global war on terror' along with a push by donors and the United Nations for closer integration between humanitarian action and diplomatic, military and other spheres of engagement in conflict and crisis-affected states (HPG 2010). As we enter an era of rising commodity prices and increasing uncertainty in global food production due to a changing climate, scientific data and analysis will be increasingly important to improve the targeting of humanitarian assistance. Earth science data enables appropriate humanitarian response to complex food emergencies that arise in regions outside the areas of current strategic and security focus. As the climate changes, new places will become vulnerable to food insecurity and will need emergency assistance. Earth science data and multidisciplinary models will enable an information-based comparison of need that goes beyond strategic and political considerations to identify new hotspots of food insecurity as they emerge. These analyses will improve aid targeting and timeliness while reducing strategic risk by highlighting new regions at risk of crisis in a rapidly changing world. Improved targeting with respect to timing and location could reduce cost while increasing the likelihood that those who need aid get it.
The history of the 127 kg stony meteorite that fell at Ensisheim in Alsace on November 7, 1492 is reviewed along with people's responses to it through the 500 years since the fall. Stories surrounding the various theories of the time are shown by poems, religious tracts, graphic illustrations and paintings, and broadsheets issued over various periods in the context of politics. Consideration is given to the Ensisheim Stone as analyzed in Paris and Berlin.
Society is in the midst of IT, Bio, Nano, Quantum and Energetics Technology Revolutions, which have changed and are changing econometrics, national security, health, transportation, shopping, travel, cost of living, socialization, commerce, employment, and education. We are now beyond the Industrial Age, are in the IT Age and heading rapidly into the Virtual Age.In that process we are changing from physical activities to virtual activities, developing and embracing tele-everything including tele-commuting, tele-work, tele-travel, tele-education, tele-shopping, tele-medicine, tele-commerce, tele-socialization, tele-politics and with on-site printing manufacture, tele-manufacturing. The gig economy, largely on the web and operated virtually, is a large and increasing portion of the national economy. Tele-everything took a great leap forward during the COVID pandemic response
With the political and economic atmosphere changing so drastically, NASA has found it necessary to change its mission from one of exploration to that of accountability and application. These changes have made it difficult for NASA to access how its roles and constituency groups have changed in response. Specifically, at the MSFC Space Sciences Lab, management must now decide the most appropriate communication objectives, strategies and target market to direct messages reflecting these changes. Complicating the issue is that MSFC, must walk a fine line between looking as though it is spending too much money and 'marketing' themselves, which it is strictly prohibited from doing, and imparting the information in an exciting enough form to be picked up by the media.
It will be shown that the greatest barrier to American exploration of the planet Mars is not the development of the technology needed to deliver humans and return them safely to earth. Neither is it the cost of such an undertaking, as has been previously suggested, although certainly, such a venture may not be inexpensive by some measures. The predicted costs of exploration have discouraged serious political dialog on the subject. And, in fact, even optimistic projections of the NASA budget do not contain the resources required, under the existing development and management paradigm, for human space exploration programs. It will be demonstrated that the perception of the costs of such a venture, and the cultural responses to the perceptions are factors inhibiting American exploration of the moon and the planet Mars. Cost models employed in the aerospace industry today correctly mirror the history of past space programs, and as such, are representative of the existing management and development paradigms. However, if, under this current paradigm no major exploration programs are feasible, then cost analysis methods based in the past may not have great utility in exploring the needed cultural changes. This paper explores the use of a new type of model, the activity based cost model, which will treat management style as an input variable, in a sense providing a tool whereby a complete, affordable program might be designed, including both the technological and management aspects.
Airship Industry Study: In 2015, NASA Ames Research Center completed a study of the overall airship industry. The project called for a report that describes airship concepts proposed or projects initiated in recent years, airship performance or capability targets, and the missions these activities were addressing. The resulting report details the principal technical features of these airships, the proposed value/advantages of the features, notional concepts of operation, and challenges associated with such vehicles. The study investigated the current status and near-term prospects of these airship development activities, whether they are active or, if curtailed, the circumstances and possible reasons for that conclusion, including technical, business, or other mitigating factors. This presentation provides highlights of the Airship Industry Study investigations, findings, and recommendations. UAS Carrier Concept: The advantages of utilizing an airship as an airborne carrier for support and deployment of Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) are examined. Whether as a stand-alone platform or in concert with conventional aircraft, the airship UAS carrier provides a number of compelling benefits for both military and civilian missions. As a mobile base it can remain operational despite political fallout that may render ground or ocean based UAS sites unavailable. It offers the psychological impact of a power projection tool that has few geographical limits, and holds promise as a new method for cost-saving intelligence gathering. It is also adaptable for civilian variants for supporting: emergency response, security/surveillance, delivery of medical/food supplies, as well as commercial package delivery to metropolitan and remote communities.