DOCSLIB.ORG

ODQN 4-1.Pub

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ODQN 4-1.Pub A publication of The Orbital Debris Program Office NASA Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas 77058 January 1999 Volume 4, Issue 1. Project Reviews International Space Station Debris Risk Assessment Process Dana M. Lear, Eric L. Christiansen element, conceptually a small, flat panel, which Since the first ISS M/OD assessments, Finite is used to define all of the outermost ISS The 8th International Space Station Integrated Element Models (FEMs) have been used to surfaces. The current ISS FEM consists of Meteoroid & Orbital Debris Threat Assessment define the physical shape of ISS surfaces. The approximately 90,000 of these elements (Figure (ITA) is currently underway, with release smallest analysis feature on the FEM is the 1). Each element has an associated Property planned for early 1999. Ana- Identification Number, or lysts at the NASA/Johnson PID, and a Ballistic Limit Space Center’s Hypervelocity Equation, or BLE. Impact Technology Facility Groups of elements are (HIT-F) have been producing used to make up module ITAs since the early 1990s in surface features; these in support of the International turn are used to make up Space Station effort. Frequent ISS modules. The ISS assembly plan changes modules are then have facilitated the need to re- assembled further into a peat the assessments every 9 to complete ISS FEM. This 12 months. Although the as- FEM information is used sessments typically require 6 by the analysis computer months to produce, each is the program, BUMPER-II, to result of many years of testing perform the fundamental and research. The overall as- M/OD risk calculations. sessment process is complex but can be simplified into four The meteoroid and orbital general areas of concentration: debris environments im- (1) Finite Element Model defi- plemented in BUMPER-II nition, (2) M/OD environment are described in NASA model definition, (3) ballistic documents SSP 30425 limit equation definition, and and TM 104825. Each of (4) overall probability Figure 1. ISS Finite Element Model ITA-6: Assembly Complete Configuration. these documents contains analysis. Approximately 90,000 elements total. Large PV arrays and orbiter not included. (Continued on page 2) Inside... Update from NASA’s Orbital Debris Observatory .................................................................... 3 1998 Ends with Eighth Satellite Breakup .................................................................................... 5 EVOLVE 4.0 Preliminary Results ............................................................................................... 6 Post-Flight Inspection STS-89 ..................................................................................................... 7 1 The Orbital Debris Quarterly News Project Reviews, Continued International Space Station Debris Risk Assessment Process, Continued (Continued from page 1) PNI. But what if we want to know how many angle, and particle diameter (Figure 3). The information about M/OD particle of these impacting particles will penetrate the element property identification numbers, or concentrations, sizes, orbits, and altitudes. surface? To take this extra analysis step with PIDs mentioned earlier, are used to link a par- Figure 2 illustrates the M/OD threat directions BUMPER-II, it is necessary to describe the ticular BLE to a region of the FEM. A penetra- assessed in BUMPER-II. threshold size of an impacting particle that just tion occurs above a particular BLE curve for a penetrates each particular surface of the FEM, given impact angle and impact velocity. The FEM and M/OD environment provide suf- and requires use of the BLE. BUMPER-II uses the discrete velocity and ficient information for BUMPER-II to deter- angle distributions with the BLEs for each PID mine how many M/OD particles of a particular The BLEs have been derived from analysis to assess the Probability of Non-Penetration, or diameter will impact the FEM over a specific based on thousands of hypervelocity impact PNP (Figure 4). period of time including the effects of tests. A BLE defines the maximum, or critical, shadowing. An M/OD analysis of this type is particle diameter that a particular surface can called a Probability of Non-Impact analysis, or withstand as a function of velocity, impact Figure 2. M/OD Threat Directions Figure 3. Typical PID Ballistic Limit Equation Curves Meteoroid - 149 threat directions. Debris - 90 threat directions. Impact angles of 0o and 60o (for illustration only) (Each threat direction for EACH element assessed.) Figure 4. Examples of BUMPER PNI & PNP Results. Upper Table provides the PNI and PNP for each element of the FEM. Graphic in lower left-hand corner describes the assessed orbital debris penetration risk on a particular surface PID as a function of impact angle and velocity. Graphic in lower right-hand corner provides a color-coded illustration of predicted high (red) versus low (blue) impact zones on the FEM. (for illustration only) 2 The Orbital Debris Quarterly News Project Reviews Update from NASA’s Orbital Debris Observatory John L. Africano and John V. Lambert components: a dual-processor Pentium-II PC with 54 Gbytes of disk space, an IEEE-1394 Observational Results: Liquid Mirror Telescope SCSI-PCI card, and a Sony DHR-1000 digital video tape player. The software consists of We have completed manual processing of the 1998 Summer Shutdown: special-purpose digital video C-code and IDL first forty-seven video tapes, about seventy-five processing routines developed by Lockheed- hours of data, collected by the LMT. In these Each year the LMT is closed for maintenance Martin at JSC. The program controls the digital observations, we detected 62 correlated objects during the summer months because of poor video tape player; decodes the compressed and 231 uncorrelated targets (UCTs). weather. As part of the general housekeeping video images; automatically detects and Assuming an albedo of 0.1 for the debris this year, the dome and prime focus areas were measures the positions and brightnesses of objects we are detecting objects down to about thoroughly cleaned, and all electrical moving objects; and compiles a report on all 2 to 3 cm in diameter. About 30 of these connections were checked and reseated. The detected debris. The human operator can uncorrelated objects may be associated with the mirror support system was re-aligned so that review and verify the video record for each RORSAT sodium potassium (NaK) droplets. there is less than a one arc-second error detection event. The debris detection software Assuming a 0.8 albedo for these objects leads between the main bearing rotational axis and is now in the final stages of development and to detections as small as 1.5 cm. the gravity vector. A new optics package, an testing. aspherical doublet corrector, was also installed The LMT and the Haystack radar detection replacing the rear single element of the old We have tested the automated debris detection rates as a function of object size are compared corrector. This new corrector removes field system using about thirty-two hours of digital in Figure 1. The observed Haystack detection distortion, provides better image quality over a video data, some 3.6 million images, previously rate was increased by a factor of 5.2 to account larger field-of-view, and covers a broader processed by human screeners. The automated for the difference between the LMT (0.24 spectral range. Preliminary results confirm processing is somewhat slower (sixteen times degrees) and Haystack (0.05 degrees) beam improved image quality from the new corrector real time) than the manual processing, but well sizes. While there are still several additional which should permit the LMT to detect fainter worth it. Comparisons between the results of observational biases to be considered in objects. Regular operations resumed on the automated system and the human screeners processing the LMT data, the optical results are October 12, 1998 and, by mid-November, fifty indicate that, while the automated detection very consistent with the radar results. The main hours of debris observations had been obtained. system may occasionally miss a debris event difference occurs in the 5 to 20 cm size regime. located very close to the edge of the field-of- At this time we are exploring possible Automated Debris Detection System: view, it almost always finds one or two explanations for these differences. additional events per tape not found by either We have developed a prototype hardware/ screener. Once operational, the automated The total number of detectable objects in orbit software system to automate the debris debris detection system will allow us to keep up was estimated from the LMT observations detection process. The hardware portion of the with the large volume of data being collected using a variation of the technique developed by system is composed entirely of off-the-shelf each clear night by the LMT. (Continued on page 4) 100 Haystack 6000 10 5000 LMT ects j 4000 1 3000 Detections/Hour 2000 0.1 Number of Ob 1000 0 0.01 0 500 1000 1500 2000 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 Estimated Size (m) Altitude (km) Figure 1. Comparison of Optical and Radar Size Distributions. Figure 2. LMT Optical Population Estimates. 3 The Orbital Debris Quarterly News Project Reviews Update from NASA’s Orbital Debris Observatory, Continued (Continued from page 3) size sensitivity of the LMT with altitude in the Figure 3 presents a typical CCD exposure. The Seniw (1992). This approach assumes that the above estimate. Examination of the cataloged telescope is moved to a particular azimuth and arrival rate of orbiting objects into the LMT and derived altitude distributions in Figure 2 elevation. The telescope is allowed to settle field-of-view obeys Poisson statistics and that suggests a possible undersampling of objects in with the drives turned off, then a 20 second the objects are randomly distributed in circular sun-synchronous orbits which can not be exposure is taken. Since the telescope is not orbits. A basic limitation in deriving the orbital observed by the LMT.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Aerospace Dimensions Leader's Guide
    Leader Guide www.capmembers.com/ae Leader Guide for Aerospace Dimensions 2011 Published by National Headquarters Civil Air Patrol Aerospace Education Maxwell AFB, Alabama 3 LEADER GUIDES for AEROSPACE DIMENSIONS INTRODUCTION A Leader Guide has been provided for every lesson in each of the Aerospace Dimensions’ modules. These guides suggest possible ways of presenting the aerospace material and are for the leader’s use. Whether you are a classroom teacher or an Aerospace Education Officer leading the CAP squadron, how you use these guides is up to you. You may know of different and better methods for presenting the Aerospace Dimensions’ lessons, so please don’t hesitate to teach the lesson in a manner that works best for you. However, please consider covering the lesson outcomes since they represent important knowledge we would like the students and cadets to possess after they have finished the lesson. Aerospace Dimensions encourages hands-on participation, and we have included several hands-on activities with each of the modules. We hope you will consider allowing your students or cadets to participate in some of these educational activities. These activities will reinforce your lessons and help you accomplish your lesson out- comes. Additionally, the activities are fun and will encourage teamwork and participation among the students and cadets. Many of the hands-on activities are inexpensive to use and the materials are easy to acquire. The length of time needed to perform the activities varies from 15 minutes to 60 minutes or more. Depending on how much time you have for an activity, you should be able to find an activity that fits your schedule.
    [Show full text]
  • L AUNCH SYSTEMS Databk7 Collected.Book Page 18 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM Databk7 Collected.Book Page 19 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM
    databk7_collected.book Page 17 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM CHAPTER TWO L AUNCH SYSTEMS databk7_collected.book Page 18 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM databk7_collected.book Page 19 Monday, September 14, 2009 2:53 PM CHAPTER TWO L AUNCH SYSTEMS Introduction Launch systems provide access to space, necessary for the majority of NASA’s activities. During the decade from 1989–1998, NASA used two types of launch systems, one consisting of several families of expendable launch vehicles (ELV) and the second consisting of the world’s only partially reusable launch system—the Space Shuttle. A significant challenge NASA faced during the decade was the development of technologies needed to design and implement a new reusable launch system that would prove less expensive than the Shuttle. Although some attempts seemed promising, none succeeded. This chapter addresses most subjects relating to access to space and space transportation. It discusses and describes ELVs, the Space Shuttle in its launch vehicle function, and NASA’s attempts to develop new launch systems. Tables relating to each launch vehicle’s characteristics are included. The other functions of the Space Shuttle—as a scientific laboratory, staging area for repair missions, and a prime element of the Space Station program—are discussed in the next chapter, Human Spaceflight. This chapter also provides a brief review of launch systems in the past decade, an overview of policy relating to launch systems, a summary of the management of NASA’s launch systems programs, and tables of funding data. The Last Decade Reviewed (1979–1988) From 1979 through 1988, NASA used families of ELVs that had seen service during the previous decade.
    [Show full text]
  • Satellite Systems
    Chapter 18 REST-OF-WORLD (ROW) SATELLITE SYSTEMS For the longest time, space exploration was an exclusive club comprised of only two members, the United States and the Former Soviet Union. That has now changed due to a number of factors, among the more dominant being economics, advanced and improved technologies and national imperatives. Today, the number of nations with space programs has risen to over 40 and will continue to grow as the costs of spacelift and technology continue to decrease. RUSSIAN SATELLITE SYSTEMS The satellite section of the Russian In the post-Soviet era, Russia contin- space program continues to be predomi- ues its efforts to improve both its military nantly government in character, with and commercial space capabilities. most satellites dedicated either to civil/ These enhancements encompass both military applications (such as communi- orbital assets and ground-based space cations and meteorology) or exclusive support facilities. Russia has done some military missions (such as reconnaissance restructuring of its operating principles and targeting). A large portion of the regarding space. While these efforts have Russian space program is kept running by attempted not to detract from space-based launch services, boosters and launch support to military missions, economic sites, paid for by foreign commercial issues and costs have lead to a lowering companies. of Russian space-based capabilities in The most obvious change in Russian both orbital assets and ground station space activity in recent years has been the capabilities. decrease in space launches and corre- The influence of Glasnost on Russia's sponding payloads. Many of these space programs has been significant, but launches are for foreign payloads, not public announcements regarding space Russian.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report of S.P
    ANNUAL REPORT OF S.P. KOROLEV ROCKET AND SPACE PUBLIC CORPORATION ENERGIA FOR 2019 This Annual Report of S.P.Korolev Rocket and Space Public Corporation Energia (RSC Energia) was prepared based upon its performance in 2019 with due regard for the requirements stated in the Russian Federation Government Decree of December 31, 2010 No. 1214 “On Improvement of the Procedure to Control Open Joint-Stock Companies whose Stock is in Federal Ownership and Federal State Unitary Enterprises”, and in accordance with the Regulations “On Information Disclosure by the Issuers of Outstanding Securities” No. 454-P approved by the Bank of Russia on December 30, 2014 Accuracy of the data contained in this Annual Report, including the Report on the interested-party transactions effected by RSC Energia in 2019, was confirmed by RSC Energia’s Auditing Committee Report as of 01.06.2020. This Annual Report was preliminary approved by RSC Energia’s Board of Directors on August 24, 2020 (Minutes No. 31). This Annual Report was approved at RSC Energia’s General Shareholders’ Meeting on September 28, 2020 (Minutes No 40 of 01.10.2020). 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT RSC ENERGIA ............................. 6 1.1. Company background .........................................................................................................................6 1.2. Period of the Company operation in the industry ...............................................................................6 1.3. Information about the purchase and sale contracts for participating interests, equities, shares of business partnerships and companies concluded by the Company in 2019 ..............................................7 1.4. Information about the holding structure and the organizations involved ...........................................8 2. PRIORITY DIRECTIONS OF RSC ENERGIA OPERATION ........................ 11 2.1.
    [Show full text]
  • The International Space Station and the Space Shuttle
    Order Code RL33568 The International Space Station and the Space Shuttle Updated November 9, 2007 Carl E. Behrens Specialist in Energy Policy Resources, Science, and Industry Division The International Space Station and the Space Shuttle Summary The International Space Station (ISS) program began in 1993, with Russia joining the United States, Europe, Japan, and Canada. Crews have occupied ISS on a 4-6 month rotating basis since November 2000. The U.S. Space Shuttle, which first flew in April 1981, has been the major vehicle taking crews and cargo back and forth to ISS, but the shuttle system has encountered difficulties since the Columbia disaster in 2003. Russian Soyuz spacecraft are also used to take crews to and from ISS, and Russian Progress spacecraft deliver cargo, but cannot return anything to Earth, since they are not designed to survive reentry into the Earth’s atmosphere. A Soyuz is always attached to the station as a lifeboat in case of an emergency. President Bush, prompted in part by the Columbia tragedy, made a major space policy address on January 14, 2004, directing NASA to focus its activities on returning humans to the Moon and someday sending them to Mars. Included in this “Vision for Space Exploration” is a plan to retire the space shuttle in 2010. The President said the United States would fulfill its commitments to its space station partners, but the details of how to accomplish that without the shuttle were not announced. The shuttle Discovery was launched on July 4, 2006, and returned safely to Earth on July 17.
    [Show full text]
  • 1998 Year in Review
    Associate Administrator for Commercial Space Transportation (AST) January 1999 COMMERCIAL SPACE TRANSPORTATION: 1998 YEAR IN REVIEW Cover Photo Credits (from left): International Launch Services (1998). Image is of the Atlas 2AS launch on June 18, 1998, from Cape Canaveral Air Station. It successfully orbited the Intelsat 805 communications satellite for Intelsat. Boeing Corporation (1998). Image is of the Delta 2 7920 launch on September 8, 1998, from Vandenberg Air Force Base. It successfully orbited five Iridium communications satellites for Iridium LLP. Lockheed Martin Corporation (1998). Image is of the Athena 2 awaiting its maiden launch on January 6, 1998, from Spaceport Florida. It successfully deployed the NASA Lunar Prospector. Orbital Sciences Corporation (1998). Image is of the Taurus 1 launch from Vandenberg Air Force Base on February 10, 1998. It successfully orbited the Geosat Follow-On 1 military remote sensing satellite for the Department of Defense, two Orbcomm satellites and the Celestis 2 funerary payload for Celestis Corporation. Orbital Sciences Corporation (1998). Image is of the Pegasus XL launch on December 5, 1998, from Vandenberg Air Force Base. It successfully orbited the Sub-millimeter Wave Astronomy Satellite for the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory. 1998 YEAR IN REVIEW INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION In 1998, U.S. launch service providers conducted In addition, 1998 saw continuing demand for 22 launches licensed by the Federal Aviation launches to deploy the world’s first low Earth Administration (FAA), an increase of 29 percent orbit (LEO) communication systems. In 1998, over the 17 launches conducted in 1997. Of there were 17 commercial launches to LEO, 14 these 22, 17 were for commercial or international of which were for the Iridium, Globalstar, and customers, resulting in a 47 percent share of the Orbcomm LEO communications constellations.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C
    Federal Communications Commission DA 06-4 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) AFRISPACE, INC. ) IB File No. SAT-LOA-20050311- ) 00061 Application for Authority to Launch and ) Operate a Replacement Satellite, AfriStar-2, ) Call Sign: S2666 at 21° E.L. and to Co-locate It with AfriStar-1 ) ) ORDER AND AUTHORIZATION Adopted: January 03, 2006 Released: January 03, 2006 By the Chief, International Bureau: I. INTRODUCTION 1. By this Order, we authorize AfriSpace, Inc. (AfriSpace)1 to launch and operate the AfriStar-2 satellite in the geostationary-satellite orbit (GSO) at the 21° East Longitude (E.L.) orbital location. AfriStar-2 is controlled from the United States and is capable of providing Broadcasting-Satellite Service (sound) (BSS (sound)) to Africa and Europe on a non-common carrier basis. We authorize AfriStar-2 to operate downlinks within 2.6 megahertz of spectrum in each polarization with a center frequency of 1479.5 MHz. We also authorize AfriSpace to utilize feeder links and telecommand links for the AfriStar-2 satellite in the 7025-7075 MHz frequency band, to operate its telemetry link for the AfriStar-2 satellite at a center frequency of 1491.7 MHz, and to co-locate the AfriStar-2 satellite at 21° E.L. with the AfriStar-1 satellite currently in orbit. In addition, we grant AfriSpace a waiver of the Commission’s rule regarding transponder saturation flux densities for the AfriStar-2 satellite.2 These authorizations give AfriSpace the capability to continue to provide service to existing customers despite unanticipated technical difficulties experienced by the AfriStar-1 satellite and to serve new customers, conditioned on AfriSpace complying with the applicable laws, regulations, rules, and licensing procedures of any countries it proposes to serve.
    [Show full text]
  • November 23, 2016 VIA ELECTRONIC FILING Marlene H
    November 23, 2016 VIA ELECTRONIC FILING Marlene H. Dortch, Secretary Federal Communications Commission 445 12th Street, S.W. Room TW-A325 Washington, DC 20554 Re: SAT-ASG-20161025-00101 Application for Assignment of Authorizations for AfriStar-1 and AfriStar-2 (call signs S2367 and S2666) from Yazmi USA, LLC (“Yazmi”) to Silkwave Africa, LLC (“Silkwave”). Dear Ms. Dortch: At the request of FCC staff, we are submitting this letter in the docket for the above-named application (the “Application”) to supplement statements made in the Public Interest Statement of that Application. The Public Interest Statement explained that the AfriStar-1 satellite will be initially controlled by Intelsat pursuant to an agreement between Intelsat, Silkwave, and an affiliate of Silkwave. The affiliate of Silkwave referred to is New York Broadband LLC, a U.S. limited liability company (“NYBB”). NYBB is affiliated with Silkwave because Chi Capital, which owns 100% of Silkwave, also has a minority ownership interest in NYBB. NYBB owns an Australian-licensed satellite, AsiaStar, which is operated by Intelsat pursuant to an agreement between NYBB and Intelsat (the “NYBB Agreement”). The AsiaStar satellite was also acquired from Yazmi pursuant to a series of earlier transactions not requiring FCC approval. The AfriStar-1 satellite is currently being operated by Intelsat pursuant to a separate agreement between Yazmi and Intelsat (the “Yazmi Agreement”). The parties intend that, following the transfer of the AfriStar-1 license to Silkwave, Intelsat will continue to operate the AfriStar-1 satellite on Silkwave’s behalf, either through an amended Yazmi Agreement, or more likely through an amended NYBB Agreement that includes the AfriStar-1 satellite and adds Silkwave as a party.
    [Show full text]
  • Columbia Accident Investigation Board
    COLUMBIA ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION BOARD Report Volume I August 2003 COLUMBIA ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION BOARD On the Front Cover This was the crew patch for STS-107. The central element of the patch was the microgravity symbol, µg, flowing into the rays of the Astronaut symbol. The orbital inclination was portrayed by the 39-degree angle of the Earthʼs horizon to the Astronaut symbol. The sunrise was representative of the numerous science experiments that were the dawn of a new era for continued microgravity research on the International Space Station and beyond. The breadth of science conduct- ed on this mission had widespread benefits to life on Earth and the continued exploration of space, illustrated by the Earth and stars. The constellation Columba (the dove) was chosen to symbolize peace on Earth and the Space Shuttle Columbia. In addition, the seven stars represent the STS-107 crew members, as well as honoring the original Mercury 7 astronauts who paved the way to make research in space possible. The Israeli flag represented the first person from that country to fly on the Space Shuttle. On the Back Cover This emblem memorializes the three U.S. human space flight accidents – Apollo 1, Challenger, and Columbia. The words across the top translate to: “To The Stars, Despite Adversity – Always Explore“ Limited First Printing, August 2003, by the Columbia Accident Investigation Board Subsequent Printing and Distribution by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 2 Report Volume I August 2003 COLUMBIA ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION BOARD IN MEMORIAM Rick D. Husband Commander William C.
    [Show full text]
  • Journal of Space Law
    JOURNAL OF SPACE LAW VOLUME 24, NUMBER 2 1996 JOURNAL OF SPACE LAW A journal devoted to the legal problems arising out of human activities in outer space VOLUME 24 1996 NUMBERS 1 & 2 EDITORIAL BOARD AND ADVISORS BERGER, HAROLD GALLOWAY, ElLENE Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Washington, D.C. BOCKSTIEGEL, KARL·HEINZ HE, QIZHI Cologne, Germany Beijing, China BOUREr.. Y, MICHEL G. JASENTULIYANA, NANDASIRI Paris, France Vienna. Austria COCCA, ALDO ARMANDO KOPAL, VLADIMIR Buenes Aires, Argentina Prague, Czech Republic DEMBLING, PAUL G. McDOUGAL, MYRES S. Washington, D. C. New Haven. Connecticut DIEDERIKS·VERSCHOOR, IE. PH. VERESHCHETIN, V.S. Baarn, Holland Moscow. Russ~an Federation FASAN, ERNST ZANOTTI, ISIDORO N eunkirchen, Austria Washington, D.C. FINCH, EDWARD R., JR. New York, N.Y. STEPHEN GOROVE, Chairman Oxford, Mississippi All correspondance should be directed to the JOURNAL OF SPACE LAW, P.O. Box 308, University, MS 38677, USA. Tel./Fax: 601·234·2391. The 1997 subscription rates for individuals are $84.80 (domestic) and $89.80 (foreign) for two issues, including postage and handling The 1997 rates for organizations are $99.80 (domestic) and $104.80 (foreign) for two issues. Single issues may be ordered for $56 per issue. Copyright © JOURNAL OF SPACE LAW 1996. Suggested abbreviation: J. SPACE L. JOURNAL OF SPACE LAW A journal devoted to the legal problems arising out of human activities in outer space VOLUME 24 1996 NUMBER 2 CONTENTS In Memoriam ~ Tribute to Professor Dr. Daan Goedhuis. (N. J asentuliyana) I Articles Financing and Insurance Aspects of Spacecraft (I.H. Ph. Diederiks-Verschoor) 97 Are 'Stratospheric Platforms in Airspace or Outer Space? (M.
    [Show full text]
  • STS-132 Mission Summary
    NASA Mission Summary National Aeronautics and Space Administration Washington, D.C. 20546 (202) 358-1100 STS-132 MISSION SUMMARY May 2010 SPACE SHUTTLE ATLANTIS Atlantis’ 12-day mission will deliver the Russian-built Mini Research Module-1 that will provide additional storage space and a new docking port for Russian Soyuz and Progress spacecraft. MRM-1, also known as Rassvet, which means dawn in Russian, will be permanently attached to the bottom port of the station’s Zarya module. MRM-1 will carry important hardware on its exterior including a radiator, airlock and a European robotic arm. Atlantis also will deliver addi- tional station hardware stored inside a cargo carrier. Three spacewalks are planned to stage spare components outside the station, including six spare batteries, a Ku-band antenna and spare parts for the Canadian Dextre robotic arm. Shuttle mission STS-132 is the final sched- uled flight for Atlantis . CREW Ken Ham Tony Antonelli (an-tuh-NEL-lee) Commander (Captain, U.S. Navy) Pilot (Commander, U.S. Navy) ● Veteran of one spaceflight, STS-124 pilot ● Veteran of one spaceflight, STS-119 pilot ● Age: 45, Born: Plainfield, N.J. ● Born: Detroit ● Married with two children ● Married with two children ● Logged 5,000+ hours in 40 different aircraft ● Logged 3,200+ hours in 41 different aircraft ● Call sign: Hock ● Interests include snow boarding and NASCAR Garrett Reisman (REESE-man) Michael Good Mission Specialist-1 Mission Specialist-2 (Col., U.S. Air Force, Ret.) ● Veteran flight engineer on Expedition 16 & 17 ● Veteran of one spaceflight, STS-125 ● Launched on STS-123; returned STS-124 ● Age: 47, Hometown: Broadview Heights, Ohio ● Age: 42, Hometown: Parsippany, N.J.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report
    The 2008 Annual Report of the International Space Exploration Coordination Group Released March 2009 International Space Exploration Coordination Group (ISECG) – Annual Report:2008 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK 1 International Space Exploration Coordination Group (ISECG) – Annual Report:2008 CONTENTS Introduction …………………………………………………………………………… 4 Part 1: The Role of the ISECG 1.1 Overview …………………………………………………………………………. 6 1.2 Working Groups of the ISECG …………………………………………………… 7 1.2.1 Enhancement of Public Engagement …………………………………………… 7 1.2.2 Establishment of Relationships with Existing International Working Groups …. 7 1.2.3 The International Space Exploration Coordination Tool (INTERSECT) ……. 8 1.2.4 The Space Exploration Interface Standards Working Group (ISWG) ………….. 8 1.2.5 Mapping the Space Exploration Journey ………………………………………... 8 Part 2: Current and Near-Term Activities of ISECG Members 2.1 Low Earth Orbit (LEO) …………………………………………………………… 10 2.1.1 The International Space Station (ISS) …………………………………………… 10 2.1.2 Emerging Government Capabilities …………………………………………….. 10 2.1.3 Emerging Commercial Providers ……………………………………………….. 11 2.2 Beyond LEO – The Moon and Mars ……………………………………………….. 11 2.2.1 Moon ……………………………………………………………………………… 11 2.2.2 Mars ………………………………………………………………………………. 12 Part 3: Progress in 2008 towards Opportunities for Integrated and Collaborative Space Exploration 3.1 Robotic Network Science – The International Lunar Network ……………………… 16 3.2 Joint Development for Robotic Exploration – Mars Sample Return ………………………… 17 3.3 Collaborative
    [Show full text]