DOCSLIB.ORG

Gao-14-338Sp, Nasa

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gao-14-338Sp, Nasa United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Committees April 2014 NASA Assessments of Selected Large-Scale Projects GAO-14-338SP April 2014 NASA Assessments of Selected Large-Scale Projects Highlights of GAO-14-338SP, a report to congressional committees Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found This is GAO’s annual assessment of The National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s (NASA) total portfolio of NASA’s major projects. This report major projects saw cost and schedule growth that remains low compared to provides a snapshot of how well NASA GAO’s first review of the portfolio. Some projects in this year’s portfolio launched is planning and executing its major within their cost and schedule baselines; however, several others are undergoing acquisitions. In 2013, GAO reported replans, which could temper the portfolio's positive performance. For example, that the performance of NASA's major the Mars Atmosphere and Volatile EvolutioN project launched on time and cost projects had improved since GAO’s about $35 million less than its baseline estimate, but NASA officials are reporting first assessment in 2009, due, in part, that issues with the Ice, Cloud, and Land Elevation Satellite-2 project’s primary to some underperforming projects instrument are driving costs to exceed the original baseline by at least 15 launching and some demonstrating percent, and that the project will miss its committed launch date. progress meeting practices that GAO has reported decrease cost and NASA projects have continued to make progress in maturing technologies prior schedule risk. to the preliminary design review. This year, 63 percent of projects met this In response to an explanatory standard, up from only 29 percent of projects in 2010. For example, in statement of the House Committee on preparation for its upcoming confirmation review, one project has matured all 10 Appropriations accompanying the of its critical technologies, which GAO’s past work has shown is important to Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009, this decrease the likelihood of cost and schedule growth. NASA’s heightened report assesses (1) the current status awareness of reducing technology risk is further evidenced by new guidance of NASA’s portfolio of major projects, aimed at ensuring continued focus on technical maturity. As NASA continues to (2) NASA's progress in developing and undertake more complex projects it will be important to maintain heightened maturing critical technologies (3) attention to best practices to lessen the risk of technology development and efforts NASA has taken to improve continue positive cost and schedule performance. design stability of its projects, and (4) any challenges to NASA’s NASA projects are maintaining steady performance toward meeting GAO’s best management of the portfolio. GAO practices for design stability, and the agency has also increased its focus on assessed 2013 and 2014 data on design stability. GAO has found over past several years that projects have NASA’s 18 major projects and the consistently reported higher percentages of drawings releasable at the critical Commercial Crew program all with an design review and lower percentages of drawing growth after that time, which estimated life-cycle cost of over $250 indicates that project design stability has increased overall. NASA has taken million, such as data on the projects’ steps to enhance its ability to assess design maturity. For example, NASA cost, schedule, technology maturity, implemented three technical indicators to assess design maturity, and projects in design stability, and contracts; the portfolio are tracking the required indicators. Additionally, experts in the analyzed monthly project status space community have identified other design stability metrics, which can be reports; and interviewed NASA and used in tandem with GAO’s and NASA’s indicators in order to provide a more contractor officials. complete and robust assessment of a project’s design stability. What GAO Recommends NASA faces several challenges that could impact its ability to effectively manage GAO is not making any new its portfolio. A primary challenge in the next few years will be to complete a series recommendations in this report, but of complex and expensive projects within constrained budgets and competing provides further evidence to support priorities. Any cost or schedule growth on NASA’s largest, most complex the importance of continuing to take projects, such as the James Webb Space Telescope, could have a ripple effect action on recommendations GAO has across the portfolio. While NASA has implemented a plan for improving its made in prior reports. NASA generally acquisition management, monitoring NASA’s performance against that plan over agreed with GAO’s findings. time will be important in determining if the agency’s efforts to improve its acquisition management practices have become institutionalized. For example, in 2013, two projects experienced significant issues immediately after being View GAO-14-338SP. For more information, confirmed, indicating that neither project had completed an adequate contact Cristina Chaplain at (202) 512-4841 or [email protected]. assessment of risk which is necessary to ensure that the project’s cost and schedule baseline estimates were realistic. United States Government Accountability Office Contents Letter 1 Background 4 Positive Cost and Schedule Trends Continue, but Project Replans Weaken Overall Performance 9 NASA Has Made Progress in Meeting GAO’s Best Practice of Maturing Project Technology Prior to the Preliminary Design Review 13 NASA Has Increased Focus on Design Stability by Tracking Several Metrics 16 NASA Faces Several Challenges That Could Impact Management of the Portfolio 20 Project Assessments 28 Global Precipitation Measurement Mission 31 Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment Follow On 33 Ice, Cloud, and Land Elevation Satellite-2 35 Interior Exploration using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy, and Heat Transport 37 James Webb Space Telescope 39 Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer 41 Magnetospheric Multiscale 43 Mars Atmosphere and Volatile EvolutioN 45 Orbiting Carbon Observatory 2 47 Origins-Spectral Interpretation-Resource Identification- Security-Regolith Explorer 49 Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle 51 Soil Moisture Active and Passive 53 Solar Probe Plus 55 Space Launch System 57 Space Network Ground Segment Sustainment 59 Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy 61 Surface Water and Ocean Topography 63 Tracking and Data Relay Satellite Replenishment 65 Commercial Crew Program 67 Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 70 Appendix I Objectives, Scope, and Methodology 73 Page i GAO-14-338SP Assessments of Selected Large-Scale Projects Appendix II Selected Major NASA Projects Reviewed in GAO’s Annual Assessments 81 Appendix III Selected Major NASA Projects Reviewed in GAO’s 2014 Annual Assessment 83 Appendix IV Technology Readiness Levels 88 Appendix V Elements of a Sound Business Case 90 Appendix VI Comments from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration 92 Appendix VII GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 96 Tables Table 1: Development Cost and Schedule Growth of Selected Major NASA Projects Currently in the Implementation Phase 11 Table 2: Selected Major NASA Projects and Programs Reviewed in GAO’s Annual Assessments 81 Figures Figure 1: NASA’s Life Cycle for Flight Systems 5 Figure 2: Selected Major NASA Projects Reviewed in GAO’s 2014 Assessment 8 Figure 3: Average Development Cost and Schedule Growth of Selected Major NASA Projects in Implementation Phase, Both Including and Excluding JWST 10 Figure 4: Percentage of Major Projects Meeting GAO Technology Maturity Criteria at the Preliminary Design Review 14 Page ii GAO-14-338SP Assessments of Selected Large-Scale Projects Figure 5: Average Number of Critical Technologies for Projects in Implementation 15 Figure 6: Average Percentage of Releasable Engineering Drawings at Critical Design Review 17 Figure 7: Average Percentage of Drawing Growth after Critical Design Review for Selected Projects from Fiscal Year 2010 through 2014 18 Figure 8: Fiscal Year 2014 Budget Request for JWST, Orion, SLS, Commercial Crew, and All Other Major NASA Projects, 2014 through 2018 21 Figure 9: Illustration of a Sample Project Assessment 30 Page iii GAO-14-338SP Assessments of Selected Large-Scale Projects Abbreviations AFB Air Force Base AFS Air Force Station ATLAS Advanced Topographic Laser Altimeter System CCP Commercial Crew Program CCDev Commercial Crew Development CCDev 2 Commercial Crew Development Round 2 CCiCap Commercial Crew Integrated Capability CCtCap Commercial Crew Transportation Capabilities phase CDR critical design review CNES Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales (French Government Space Agency) CSA Canadian Space Agency DCI Data Collection Instrument(s) DLR German Aerospace Center EFT-1 The first Exploration Flight Test for the Orion vehicle, scheduled for September 2014 EM-1 Exploratory Mission 1, the first non-crewed launch of the Space Launch System and Orion vehicle, planned for December 2017 EM-2 Exploratory Mission 2, the first crewed launch of the Space Launch System and the Orion vehicle, planned for August 2021 EMTGO ExoMars Trace Gas Orbiter ESA European Space Agency EVM earned value management FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation FPI Fast Plasma Instrument GFZ German Research Center for Geosciences GLAST Gamma-ray Large Area Space Telescope GNC LIDAR guidance, navigation, and control light detection and ranging
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Astrodynamics
    Politecnico di Torino SEEDS SpacE Exploration and Development Systems Astrodynamics II Edition 2006 - 07 - Ver. 2.0.1 Author: Guido Colasurdo Dipartimento di Energetica Teacher: Giulio Avanzini Dipartimento di Ingegneria Aeronautica e Spaziale e-mail: [email protected] Contents 1 Two–Body Orbital Mechanics 1 1.1 BirthofAstrodynamics: Kepler’sLaws. ......... 1 1.2 Newton’sLawsofMotion ............................ ... 2 1.3 Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation . ......... 3 1.4 The n–BodyProblem ................................. 4 1.5 Equation of Motion in the Two-Body Problem . ....... 5 1.6 PotentialEnergy ................................. ... 6 1.7 ConstantsoftheMotion . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... 7 1.8 TrajectoryEquation .............................. .... 8 1.9 ConicSections ................................... 8 1.10 Relating Energy and Semi-major Axis . ........ 9 2 Two-Dimensional Analysis of Motion 11 2.1 ReferenceFrames................................. 11 2.2 Velocity and acceleration components . ......... 12 2.3 First-Order Scalar Equations of Motion . ......... 12 2.4 PerifocalReferenceFrame . ...... 13 2.5 FlightPathAngle ................................. 14 2.6 EllipticalOrbits................................ ..... 15 2.6.1 Geometry of an Elliptical Orbit . ..... 15 2.6.2 Period of an Elliptical Orbit . ..... 16 2.7 Time–of–Flight on the Elliptical Orbit . .......... 16 2.8 Extensiontohyperbolaandparabola. ........ 18 2.9 Circular and Escape Velocity, Hyperbolic Excess Speed . .............. 18 2.10 CosmicVelocities
    [Show full text]
  • NASA's Curiosity Rover Maximizes Data Sent to Earth by Using International Space Data Communication Standards
    Press Release For immediate release NASA's Curiosity Rover Maximizes Data Sent to Earth by Using International Space Data Communication Standards WASHINGTON, 22 August 2012 (CCSDS) – NASA’s Mars Science Laboratory (MSL) mission began its planned 2-year Mars surface exploration mission on August 6 after landing its large, mobile laboratory called Curiosity. The goal of the mission is to assess whether Mars has ever had, or still has, environmental conditions favorable to microbial life. Curiosity, with its one-ton payload carrying capacity carries 10 science instruments that will gather samples of rocks and soil, and process and distribute them to onboard test chambers inside analytical instruments. Some of the rover’s scientific data, including images of the surface of Mars collected by Curiosity’s 17 onboard cameras, are sent directly to and from Earth via NASA’s Deep Space Network (DSN) of large ground antennas. However, once Curiosity becomes fully operational most of the scientific and engineering data will be transferred via relay satellites that are in orbit around Mars. These are primarily the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) and the Mars Odyssey (ODY) spacecraft. The MSL Mars-Earth communications systems are using internationally-agreed space data communications standards to enable reliable transmission of the expected rich data sets to be gathered by Curiosity. These standards were developed by a team of international space data communication specialists collaborating within the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS). Use of internationally-agreed upon standards reduce cost and risk to space missions, and also offer rich “cross-support” capabilities to collaborate since key data interfaces are inherently interoperable.
    [Show full text]
  • Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter
    Chapter 6 Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter Jim Taylor, Dennis K. Lee, and Shervin Shambayati 6.1 Mission Overview The Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (MRO) [1, 2] has a suite of instruments making observations at Mars, and it provides data-relay services for Mars landers and rovers. MRO was launched on August 12, 2005. The orbiter successfully went into orbit around Mars on March 10, 2006 and began reducing its orbit altitude and circularizing the orbit in preparation for the science mission. The orbit changing was accomplished through a process called aerobraking, in preparation for the “science mission” starting in November 2006, followed by the “relay mission” starting in November 2008. MRO participated in the Mars Science Laboratory touchdown and surface mission that began in August 2012 (Chapter 7). MRO communications has operated in three different frequency bands: 1) Most telecom in both directions has been with the Deep Space Network (DSN) at X-band (~8 GHz), and this band will continue to provide operational commanding, telemetry transmission, and radiometric tracking. 2) During cruise, the functional characteristics of a separate Ka-band (~32 GHz) downlink system were verified in preparation for an operational demonstration during orbit operations. After a Ka-band hardware anomaly in cruise, the project has elected not to initiate the originally planned operational demonstration (with yet-to-be­ used redundant Ka-band hardware). 201 202 Chapter 6 3) A new-generation ultra-high frequency (UHF) (~400 MHz) system was verified with the Mars Exploration Rovers in preparation for the successful relay communications with the Phoenix lander in 2008 and the later Mars Science Laboratory relay operations.
    [Show full text]
  • Nasa Advisory Council Human Exploration and Operations
    NASA ADVISORY COUNCIL HUMAN EXPLORATION AND OPERATIONS COMMITTEE NASA Headquarters Washington, DC January 13-14, 2021 MEETING REPORT _____________________________________________________________ N. Wayne Hale, Chair ____________________________________________________________ Bette Siegel, Executive Secretary Table of Contents Call to Order 3 Commercial Crew Program 5 Public Comments 8 Artemis Program 9 SMD Artemis CLPS Activities 11 Moon to Mars Update 12 Solar System and Beyond 12 HERMES Instrument Update Artemis III SDT Update Advancing Biological and Physical Sciences Through Lunar Exploration 14 SMD Mars Science Update 14 Artemis Accords 15 Planetary Protection Activities 15 Discussion/Findings and Recommendations 16 Appendix A- Attendees Appendix B- HEOC Membership Appendix C- Presentations Appendix D- Agenda Appendix E- Chat Transcript Prepared by Joan M. Zimmermann Zantech IT, Inc. 2 January 13, 2021 Call to order and welcome Dr. Bette Siegel, Executive Secretary of the Human Exploration and Operations Committee (HEOC), called the meeting to order, and provided details of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), which provides governance rules for the meeting. She introduced Mr. N. Wayne Hale, Chair of the HEOC. Mr. Hale noted to the public that this particular HEO meeting counts as the last meeting of 2020, and the next scheduled meeting in March/April will be the first meeting of 2021. Mr. Hale welcomed three new members, Ms. Lynn Cline, Mr. David Thompson, and Mr. Kwatsi Alibaruho. The present meeting is focused on an update on the HEO areas, and a joint meeting with the NASA Advisory Council (NAC) Science Committee. Mr. Hale asked if NAC Chair, General Lester Lyles, who was attending the meeting virtually, had any remarks to proffer.
    [Show full text]
  • NASA's Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE)
    Geophysical Research Abstracts Vol. 13, EGU2011-5107-2, 2011 EGU General Assembly 2011 © Author(s) 2011 NASA’s Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE) Richard Elphic (1), Gregory Delory (1,2), Anthony Colaprete (1), Mihaly Horanyi (3), Paul Mahaffy (4), Butler Hine (1), Steven McClard (5), Joan Salute (6), Edwin Grayzeck (6), and Don Boroson (7) (1) NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA USA ([email protected]), (2) Space Sciences Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, CA USA, (3) Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO USA, (4) NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD USA, (5) LunarQuest Program Office, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Huntsville, AL USA, (6) Planetary Science Division, Science Mission Directorate, NASA, Washington, DC USA, (7) Lincoln Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Lexington MA USA Nearly 40 years have passed since the last Apollo missions investigated the mysteries of the lunar atmosphere and the question of levitated lunar dust. The most important questions remain: what is the composition, structure and variability of the tenuous lunar exosphere? What are its origins, transport mechanisms, and loss processes? Is lofted lunar dust the cause of the horizon glow observed by the Surveyor missions and Apollo astronauts? How does such levitated dust arise and move, what is its density, and what is its ultimate fate? The US National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council decadal surveys and the recent “Scientific Context for Exploration of the Moon” (SCEM) reports have identified studies of the pristine state of the lunar atmosphere and dust environment as among the leading priorities for future lunar science missions.
    [Show full text]
  • LADEE PDS Mission Description Center Document Document No: DES-12.LADEE.LPMD Rev.: 1.5 Effective Date: 05-13-2014
    Ames Research Title: LADEE PDS Mission Description Center Document Document No: DES-12.LADEE.LPMD Rev.: 1.5 Effective Date: 05-13-2014 Lunar Atmosphere and Dust Environment Explorer (LADEE) LADEE PDS Mission Description th May 13 , 2014 Ames Research Center Moffett Field, California National Aeronautics and Space Administration i Ames Research Title: LADEE PDS Mission Description Center Document Document No: DES-12.LADEE.LPMD Rev.: 1.5 Effective Date: 05-13-2014 This document is approved in accordance with LADEE Configuration Management Plan, C04.LADEE.CM, paragraph 3.6.1.1 Document Release Routing Approval Process. Page three of this document contains the approved routed release of this document. Approval Signatures _______________________________________ ___________ Butler Hine Date LADEE Project Manager _______________________________________ ___________ Gregory T. Delory Date LADEE Deputy Project Scientist _______________________________________ ___________ Date _______________________________________ ___________ Date ii Ames Research Title: LADEE PDS Mission Description Center Document Document No: DES-12.LADEE.LPMD Rev.: 1.5 Effective Date: 05-13-2014 This page is reserved for routing approval document iii Ames Research Title: LADEE PDS Mission Description Center Document Document No: DES-12.LADEE.LPMD Rev.: 1.5 Effective Date: 05-13-2014 REVISION HISTORY Rev. Description of Change Author(s) Effective Date 1.0 Initial draft G. Delory Nov 1, 2012 1.1 Resolved several TBDs G. Delory Nov 29, 2012 Updated TOC and prepared for conversion to PDF March 21, 1.2 G. Delory 2012 Baseline March 21, NC G. Delory 2012 Edited mission objective #2 as per PDS peer review 1.3 G. Delory April 4, 2013 results Updated mission timeline and orbit plots to reflect as- 1.4 G.
    [Show full text]
  • Constellation Program Overview
    Constellation Program Overview October 2008 hris Culbert anager, Lunar Surface Systems Project Office ASA/Johnson Space Center Constellation Program EarthEarth DepartureDeparture OrionOrion -- StageStage CrewCrew ExplorationExploration VehicleVehicle AresAres VV -- HeavyHeavy LiftLift LaunchLaunch VehicleVehicle AltairAltair LunarLunar LanderLander AresAres II -- CrewCrew LaunchLaunch VehicleVehicle Lunar Capabilities Concept Review EstablishedEstablished Lunar Lunar Transportation Transportation EstablishEstablish Lunar Lunar Surface SurfaceArchitecturesArchitectures ArchitectureArchitecture Point Point of of Departure: Departure: StrategiesStrategies which: which: Satisfy NASA NGO’s to acceptable degree ProvidesProvides crew crew & & cargo cargo delivery delivery to to & & from from the the Satisfy NASA NGO’s to acceptable degree within acceptable schedule moonmoon within acceptable schedule Are consistent with capacity and capabilities ProvidesProvides capacity capacity and and ca capabilitiespabilities consistent consistent Are consistent with capacity and capabilities withwith candidate candidate surface surface architectures architectures ofof the the transportation transportation systems systems ProvidesProvides sufficient sufficient performance performance margins margins IncludeInclude set set of of options options fo for rvarious various prioritizations prioritizations of cost, schedule & risk RemainsRemains within within programmatic programmatic constraints constraints of cost, schedule & risk ResultsResults in in acceptable
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution of the Rendezvous-Maneuver Plan for Lunar-Landing Missions
    NASA TECHNICAL NOTE NASA TN D-7388 00 00 APOLLO EXPERIENCE REPORT - EVOLUTION OF THE RENDEZVOUS-MANEUVER PLAN FOR LUNAR-LANDING MISSIONS by Jumes D. Alexunder und Robert We Becker Lyndon B, Johnson Spuce Center ffoaston, Texus 77058 NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, D. C. AUGUST 1973 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No, 3. Recipient's Catalog No. NASA TN D-7388 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date APOLLOEXPERIENCEREPORT August 1973 EVOLUTIONOFTHERENDEZVOUS-MANEUVERPLAN 6. Performing Organizatlon Code FOR THE LUNAR-LANDING MISSIONS 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. James D. Alexander and Robert W. Becker, JSC JSC S-334 10. Work Unit No. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address I - 924-22-20- 00- 72 Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center 11. Contract or Grant No. Houston, Texas 77058 13. Type of Report and Period Covered 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Technical Note I National Aeronautics and Space Administration 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington, D. C. 20546 I 15. Supplementary Notes The JSC Director waived the use of the International System of Units (SI) for this Apollo Experience I Report because, in his judgment, the use of SI units would impair the usefulness of the report or I I result in excessive cost. 16. Abstract The evolution of the nominal rendezvous-maneuver plan for the lunar landing missions is presented along with a summary of the significant developments for the lunar module abort and rescue plan. A general discussion of the rendezvous dispersion analysis that was conducted in support of both the nominal and contingency rendezvous planning is included.
    [Show full text]
  • Margie Burns
    Gumbo ~ The Grail Connection ~ February 2008 MEMBER GIVING ANALYSIS 2007 The 2007 Member Giving figures are in. Here’s a snapshot of how we ended the year. TOTAL 2007 MEMBER DONATIONS = $ 149,475 Reflects donations to: » The National Office » Grailville » Cornwall » Development Loan forgiveness » “Other” donations/in kind services through National Office Does not include $3,950 from U.S. members in other countries # OF MEMBERS GIVING All member categories = 144 of 242 (59.5%) Active & Wider Grail = 125 of 201 (62%) Emerita donations = $32,283 Development Loan Forgiveness = $ 22,375 Donated Salary / WIST training fees = $ 11,000 $ 33,375 MEMBER DONATIONS TO: National Office = $ 71,855 Grailville = $ 24,030 Cornwall = $ 19,240 A SPECIAL THANK YOU! TO ALL WHO FORGAVE THE LOANS THEY MADE TO THE GRAIL IN THE 1990S FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A DEVELOPMENT OFFICE! 1 GENERAL ASSEMBLY 2008: JUNE 23-29 SCENARIO PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE OF THE GRAIL ~ Judith Blackburn ~ for the Council Preparation for this year’s General Assembly is now underway, and a packet of scenarios depicting the Grail of the future has been distributed to members. All of the scenarios are based on the simple fact that the Grail is not now operating on a sustainable model. Your job is to help discern how we might downsize or re-focus. Times have changed. We no longer recruit women who are able or willing to donate their working lives to the Grail. At the same time we have many ongoing obligations to each other, to our properties, and to the Grail itself. One of our strengths has been how comprehensive our programming has been, but at this juncture we MUST either simplify or scale back our operations.
    [Show full text]
  • LUNAR NETWORK TRACKING ARCHITECTURE for LUNAR FLIGHT Shane B
    LUNAR NETWORK TRACKING ARCHITECTURE FOR LUNAR FLIGHT Shane B. Robinson∗ A trade study was conducted with the objective of comparing and contrasting the radiometric naviga- tion performance provided by various architectures of lunar-based navigations assets. Architectures considered consist of a compliment of two beacons located on the lunar surface, and two orbiting bea- cons that provide range and range-rate measurements to the user. Configurations of these assets include both coplanar and linked constellations of frozen elliptic orbiters and halo orbiters. Each architecture was studied during the lunar-approach, lunar-orbit, and landing phases of a South Pole lunar sortie mis- sion. Navigation filter performance was evaluated on the basis of filter convergence latency, and the steady state uncertainty in the navigation solution. The sensitivity of the filter solution to Earth-based tracking augmentation and availability of range measurements was also studied. Filter performance was examined during the build up of the lunar-based navigation system by exploring different combi- nations of orbiting and surface-based assets. 1 INTRODUCTION The objective of the work outlined in this document is to conduct a parametric trade intended to evaluate some proposed constellations of moon-orbiting navigation and communication beacons. These orbiting beacons are intended to support the lunar missions of NASA’s Constellation program. This study is sponsored by the flight performance systems integration group at JPL (FPSIG), whose work is funded by the NASA Constellation program office. The work outlined in this report will focus on investigating lunar network aided navigation performance during near lunar phases of baseline missions proposed by the Constellation program.
    [Show full text]
  • GRAIL Twins Toast New Year from Lunar Orbit
    Jet JANUARY Propulsion 2012 Laboratory VOLUME 42 NUMBER 1 GRAIL twins toast new year from Three-month ‘formation flying’ mission will By Mark Whalen lunar orbit study the moon from crust to core Above: The GRAIL team celebrates with cake and apple cider. Right: Celebrating said. “So it does take a lot of planning, a lot of test- the other spacecraft will accelerate towards that moun- GRAIL-A’s Jan. 1 lunar orbit insertion are, from left, Maria Zuber, GRAIL principal ing and then a lot of small maneuvers in order to get tain to measure it. The change in the distance between investigator, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Charles Elachi, JPL director; ready to set up to get into this big maneuver when we the two is noted, from which gravity can be inferred. Jim Green, NASA director of planetary science. go into orbit around the moon.” One of the things that make GRAIL unique, Hoffman JPL’s Gravity Recovery and Interior Laboratory (GRAIL) A series of engine burns is planned to circularize said, is that it’s the first formation flying of two spacecraft mission celebrated the new year with successful main the twins’ orbit, reducing their orbital period to a little around any body other than Earth. “That’s one of the engine burns to place its twin spacecraft in a perfectly more than two hours before beginning the mission’s biggest challenges we have, and it’s what makes this an synchronized orbit around the moon. 82-day science phase. “If these all go as planned, we exciting mission,” he said.
    [Show full text]
  • NASA: Issues for Authorization, Appropriations, and Oversight in the 113Th Congress
    NASA: Issues for Authorization, Appropriations, and Oversight in the 113th Congress Daniel Morgan Specialist in Science and Technology Policy July 11, 2013 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R43144 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress NASA: Issues for Authorization, Appropriations, and Oversight in the 113th Congress Summary Spaceflight fascinates and inspires many Americans, but in a time of constrained federal budgets, it must compete with a multitude of other national priorities. As the 113th Congress conducts oversight and considers authorization and appropriations legislation for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), an overarching question is how NASA should move forward within budget constraints. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-267) set a new direction for NASA’s human spaceflight programs. For access to low Earth orbit, including the International Space Station (ISS), it confirmed NASA’s plans to develop a commercial space transportation capability for both cargo and astronauts. The first commercial cargo flight for ISS resupply was conducted in May 2012. Pending the planned availability of commercial crew transportation in 2017, NASA is paying Russia to carry U.S. astronauts to and from the ISS on Soyuz spacecraft. Issues for Congress include the cost, schedule, and safety of future commercial crew services, as well as the need for alternatives if commercial providers do not succeed. For human exploration beyond Earth orbit, the 2010 NASA authorization act mandated development of the Orion Multipurpose Crew Vehicle and the Space Launch System (SLS) rocket to launch Orion into space.
    [Show full text]