DOCSLIB.ORG

Lessons Learned from Mir-A Payload Perspective

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lessons Learned from Mir-A Payload Perspective Acta Astronautica 56 (2005) 877–882 www.elsevier.com/locate/actaastro Lessons learned from Mir—a payload perspective John J. Uria,∗, Richard W. Nygrenb, Jeffery A. Cardenasc aISS Payloads Office, NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX 77058, USA bNASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX 77058, USA cUniversity Space Research Association, Houston, TX 77058, USA Available online 21 March 2005 Abstract Among the principal objectives of the Phase 1 NASA/Mir program were for the United States to gain experience working with an international partner, to gain working experience in long-duration space flight, and to gain working experience in planning for and executing research on a long-duration space platform. The Phase 1 program was to provide the US early experience prior to the construction and operation of the International Space Station (Phase 2 and 3). While it can be argued that Mir and ISS are different platforms and that programmatically Phase 1 and ISS are organized differently, it is also clear that many aspects of operating a long-duration research program are platform independent. This can be demonstrated by a review of lessons learned from Skylab, a US space station program of the mid-1970s, many of which were again “learned” on Mir and are being “learned” on ISS. Among these are optimum crew training strategies, on-orbit crew operations, ground support, medical operations and crew psychological support, and safety certification processes. © 2005 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Keywords: Mir; International Space Station; Research 1. Introduction this time, the United States flew its highly successful Skylab space station in 1973–1974, and began plan- The Soviet Union launched the first space station, ning for its next space station in 1984. That project, af- called Salyut, in 1971. Through the 1970s and 1980s, ter several significant modifications during its planning the Soviets launched a series of stations of increas- and development, eventually emerged as International ing complexity and sophistication, culminating with Space Station (ISS) in 1993, and brought Russia into the Mir complex, which had an outstanding career an already existing multilateral partnership including as humanity’s outpost in space from 1986 to 2001. Canada, Japan and the European Space Agency. The The Russian philosophy in this time period was to ISS program today is the inheritor of the accumulated make incremental improvements to the newer stations experience, principally Russian and American, of the based on experience from earlier platforms. During past three decades. As a research platform, that expe- rience will provide the necessary skills to maximize ∗ Corresponding author. the quality and quantity of science conducted there. 0094-5765/$ - see front matter © 2005 Published by Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.actaastro.2005.01.013 878 J.J. Uri et al. / Acta Astronautica 56 (2005) 877–882 2. Background erations as required; the Mir Operations and Integra- tion Working Group(MOIWG) was the implementing Evolving out of the original 1992 US—Russian organization, and included subgroups for training and agreement to fly each other’s crewmembers on Shut- operations, hardware integration and Shuttle mani- tle and Mir, the NASA/Mir Program became a more festing of science payloads. As outgrowths of earlier comprehensive international endeavor. The program Spacelab organizations, the MSWG and MOIWG es- was formalized in October 1994, and became known sentially provided the traditional Mission Science and as the Phase 1 Program to note that it was part of the Mission Management functions. overall International Space Station Program, which be- came Phase 2 and 3, in which Phase 2 is defined as from First Element Launch until the Joint Airlock is 3. Research program planning in place, and Phase 3 is from the Joint Airlock through Assembly Complete. Initial research planning for the NASA/Mir program The Phase 1 Program Plan identified the mission was on a very tight schedule. At the time of sign- and goals of the program: ing of the first intergovernmental agreement in June 1992, the first long-duration astronaut flight on Mir “Phase 1 represents the building block to create was scheduled for September 1994. This 15-month the experience and technical expertise for an In- template was far shorter than what NASA was accus- ternational Space Station. The program will bring tomed to for planning a typical Spacelab research mis- together the United States and Russia in a major sion, which from Announcement of Opportunity (AO) cooperative and contractual program that takes to flight was typically 2–3 years. In the event, the mis- advantage of both countries’ capabilities.” sion, called Mir 18, launched in March 1995, but the The four main objectives of NASA for the Phase 1 shortened template did not allow for the normal pro- Program [1] were: cesses to operate, and the vast majority of science for that flight was solicited from NASA in-house inves- • to learn how to work with International Partners; tigators, many of whom were principally involved in • to reduce the risks associated with development and Shuttle-based research (Fig. 1). assembling a space station; At the inception of the more comprehensive pro- • to gain operational experience for NASA in the gram to be called Phase 1 (the Mir 18/19 long-duration planning and execution of long-duration missions; missions and the STS 71 first Shuttle/Mir docking mis- • to conduct life science, microgravity, and environ- sion became informally known as Phase 1a, while the mental space research. remaining missions were dubbed Phase 1b), the initial missions were also constrained in terms of schedule, To accomplish these objectives, a Joint US/Russian with the NASA 2 mission launching only 18 months Working Groupstructure was established between after the release of the first dedicated AO, which was NASA and the Russian human space flight organi- limited to life sciences. As a result, experiment selec- zations. The nine working groups were responsible tion did not occur until other significant milestones, for the planning and execution activities involved in such as crew training, hardware development and their respective areas, and reported to a Program level timeline development, would have been passed. In Management Team 0, co-chaired by the Program addition, experiment selection was done with an in- Manager from each side. Each Working Groupwas complete understanding of the available resources, jointly chaired and was empowered to make and sign such as on-orbit crew time. agreements within their area of responsibility. At the One of the results of these factors was a significant science level, two Working Groups were established: amount of replanning and “negative” work. For ex- the Mission Science Working Group(MSWG) was ample, the first science requirements document, called responsible for defining the research requirements for Integrated Payloads Requirements Document (IPRD), all disciplines and provided science guidance and pri- for NASA 2 was compiled prior to full definition of the oritization during preflight planning and on-orbit op- selected experiments, but was required by the Russian Download English Version: https://daneshyari.com/en/article/9823190 Download Persian Version: https://daneshyari.com/article/9823190 Daneshyari.com.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Report of the Commission on the Scientific Case for Human Space Exploration
    1 ROYAL ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY Burlington House, Piccadilly London W1J 0BQ, UK T: 020 7734 4582/ 3307 F: 020 7494 0166 [email protected] www.ras.org.uk Registered Charity 226545 Report of the Commission on the Scientific Case for Human Space Exploration Professor Frank Close, OBE Dr John Dudeney, OBE Professor Ken Pounds, CBE FRS 2 Contents (A) Executive Summary 3 (B) The Formation and Membership of the Commission 6 (C) The Terms of Reference 7 (D) Summary of the activities/meetings of the Commission 8 (E) The need for a wider context 8 (E1) The Wider Science Context (E2) Public inspiration, outreach and educational Context (E3) The Commercial/Industrial context (E4) The Political and International context. (F) Planetary Science on the Moon & Mars 13 (G) Astronomy from the Moon 15 (H) Human or Robotic Explorers 15 (I) Costs and Funding issues 19 (J) The Technological Challenge 20 (J1) Launcher Capabilities (J2) Radiation (K) Summary 23 (L) Acknowledgements 23 (M) Appendices: Appendix 1 Expert witnesses consulted & contributions received 24 Appendix 2 Poll of UK Astronomers 25 Appendix 3 Poll of Public Attitudes 26 Appendix 4 Selected Web Sites 27 3 (A) Executive Summary 1. Scientific missions to the Moon and Mars will address questions of profound interest to the human race. These include: the origins and history of the solar system; whether life is unique to Earth; and how life on Earth began. If our close neighbour, Mars, is found to be devoid of life, important lessons may be learned regarding the future of our own planet. 2. While the exploration of the Moon and Mars can and is being addressed by unmanned missions we have concluded that the capabilities of robotic spacecraft will fall well short of those of human explorers for the foreseeable future.
    [Show full text]
  • The American Space Exploration Narrative from the Cold War Through the Obama Administration1
    The American Space Exploration Narrative from the Cold War through the Obama Administration1 Dora Holland2,3 and Jack O. Burns4,5 1 To appear in the journal Space Policy. 2 International Affairs Program, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO 80309 3 Current mailing address: 11161 Briggs Court, Anchorage, AK, 99516. 4 Center for Astrophysics & Space Astronomy, Department of Astrophysical & Planetary Sciences, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO 80309 5 Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (D. Holland), [email protected] (J. Burns) 2 Abstract We document how the narrative and the policies of space exploration in the United States have changed from the Eisenhower through the Obama administrations. We first examine the history of U.S. space exploration and also assess three current conditions of the field of space exploration including: 1) the increasing role of the private sector, 2) the influence of global politics and specifically the emergence of China as a global space power, and 3) the focus on a human mission to Mars. In order to further understand the narrative of U.S. space exploration, we identify five rhetorical themes: competition, prestige, collaboration, leadership, and “a new paradigm.” These themes are then utilized to analyze the content of forty documents over the course of space exploration history in the U.S. from eight U.S. presidential administrations. The historical narrative and content analysis together suggest that space exploration has developed from a discourse about a bipolar world comprised of the United States and the Soviet Union into a complicated field that encompasses many new players in the national to the industrial realms.
    [Show full text]
  • NASA History Fact Sheet
    NASA History Fact Sheet National Aeronautics and Space Administration Office of Policy and Plans NASA History Office NASA History Fact Sheet A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION by Stephen J. Garber and Roger D. Launius Launching NASA "An Act to provide for research into the problems of flight within and outside the Earth's atmosphere, and for other purposes." With this simple preamble, the Congress and the President of the United States created the national Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) on October 1, 1958. NASA's birth was directly related to the pressures of national defense. After World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union were engaged in the Cold War, a broad contest over the ideologies and allegiances of the nonaligned nations. During this period, space exploration emerged as a major area of contest and became known as the space race. During the late 1940s, the Department of Defense pursued research and rocketry and upper atmospheric sciences as a means of assuring American leadership in technology. A major step forward came when President Dwight D. Eisenhower approved a plan to orbit a scientific satellite as part of the International Geophysical Year (IGY) for the period, July 1, 1957 to December 31, 1958, a cooperative effort to gather scientific data about the Earth. The Soviet Union quickly followed suit, announcing plans to orbit its own satellite. The Naval Research Laboratory's Project Vanguard was chosen on 9 September 1955 to support the IGY effort, largely because it did not interfere with high-priority ballistic missile development programs.
    [Show full text]
  • International Space Station Facilities Research in Space 2017 and Beyond Table of Contents
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration International Space Station Facilities Research in Space 2017 and Beyond Table of Contents Welcome to the International Space Station 1 Program Managers 2 Program Scientists 3 Research Goals of Many Nations 4 An Orbiting Laboratory Complex 5 Knowledge and Benefits for All Humankind 6 Highlights from International Space Station 7 Benefits for Humanity, 2nd Edition What is an ISS Facility? 9 ISS Research History and Status 10 ISS Topology 11 Multipurpose Laboratory Facilities 21 Internal Multipurpose Facilities 23 External Multipurpose Facilities 37 Biological Research 47 Human Physiology and Adaptation Research 65 Physical Science Research 73 Earth and Space Science Research 87 Technology Demonstration Research 95 The ISS Facility Brochure is published by the NASA ISS Program Science Office. Acronyms 100 Executive Editor: Joseph S. Neigut Associate Editor: Judy M. Tate-Brown Index 104 Designer: Cynthia L. Bush NP-2017-04-014-A-JSC Welcome to the International Space Station The International Space Station (ISS) is an unprecedented human achievement from conception to construction, to operation and long-term utilization of a research platform on the frontier of space. Fully assembled and continuously inhabited by all space agency partners, this orbiting laboratory provides a unique environment in which to conduct multidisciplinary research and technology development that drives space exploration, basic discovery and Earth benefits. The ISS is uniquely capable of unraveling the mysteries of our universe— from the evolution of our planet and life on Earth to technology advancements and understanding the effects of spaceflight on the human body. This outpost also serves to facilitate human exploration beyond low-Earth orbit to other destinations in our solar system through continued habitation and experience.
    [Show full text]
  • Deep Space Exploration Roadmap
    TABLE OF CONTENTS Deep Space Exploration Roadmap Chang'E-1 Chang'E-3 Chang'E-4 HX-1 Chang'E-P1 Chang'E-P2 ILRS 2007.10 2013.12 2018 2020 2023 2026 2030 Chang'E-2 T1 Reentry Chang'E-5 Chang'E-6 Asteroid HX-2 Jupiter Mission 2010.10 test 2014.10 2019 2020 Mission 2028 2030 2024 1 Deep Space Exploration Roadmap Chang'E-1 Chang'E-2 Chang'E-3 Launched in Oct., 2007; Launched in Oct., 2010; Launched on Dec. 2nd, Carried out lunar global 2013; Explored Sun-earth L2; survey through remote On Dec. 14th, 2013, S/C December 13th, 2012, flyby sensing. Obtained lunar successfully soft landed in Asteroid 4179 Toutatis. global image and elevation designated area of Sinus map with 120m in Iridium. resolution. Mapping the abundance and distribution of various chemical elements . 2 Deep Space Exploration Roadmap Chang’E-4 Mission Land at Aitken basin of moon farside by human S/C for the first time. Communicate relay at Earth-moon L2 point. Conduct low frequency radio observation, shallow structure investigation. At flight model development phase. Relay satellite Launched in May, 2018. 3 Deep Space Exploration Roadmap Chang'E-5 Mission Autonomous lunar sampling and return to the Earth. Launched by Long March 5 rocket at Wenchang Satellite Launch Center in 2019. Study topography and geological structure, mineral composition, regolith thickness and structure. 4 Deep Space Exploration Roadmap First Mars Mission HX-1 To be launched in 2020. Scientific Objective • Feature topography and geology and their variations； • Characterize soil and water-ice content.
    [Show full text]
  • ASEN 3036 Introduction to Human Spaceflight
    Syllabus ASEN 3036 Introduction to Human Space Flight This course introduces students to the challenges and rewards of human space flight. Historical and current space programs and spacecraft will be discussed, along with the motivation, cost and rationale for human space exploration. An overview of the space environment will be presented in the context of what is needed to sustain human life and health, including physiological and psychological concerns, in a space habitat. Current events including space research will also be highlighted. Students will learn about the astronaut selection and training processes. Finally, anomalies, mission operations and future program directions, with some insight into career planning, will be covered. The emphasis on learning will be to understand the way humans approach the exploration of space and how such a bold endeavor affects us individually and as humans. Students will be encouraged to explore through readings and research different perspectives of spaceflight to include political, scientific, historical, economic, cultural, and social as well as to consider the impact on our future. Complete course information is available on the University of Colorado Boulder CANVAS learning management system. Instructor: Jim Voss, Former Astronaut, Scholar in Residence, Email: [email protected] Office: Engineering Center, ECAE 101 Prerequisites: none, open to all majors at any level Space Minor: This class is one of the elective courses for the CU Space Minor that is open to any undergraduate student from any major. For more information on the CU Space Minor see: http://www.colorado.edu/spaceminor/learn-more Textbook: Harrison, A., “Spacefaring - The Human Dimension”, University of California Press, Los Angeles, CA, 2001.
    [Show full text]
  • Reporting the Space Race
    1 Reporting the Space Race New York Times reports Sputnik’s Launch, October 4, 1957 2 Pravda reports First Satellite, October 5, 1957 (text only) 3 Daily Herald reports U.S. Rocket Blowing Up, December 7, 1957 5 Secret Soviet Plan for Larger Satellite, September 25, 1956 (text only) 6 U.S. Assessment of American Reaction to Sputnik, 1958 (text only) 12 U.S. Assessment of World Reaction to Both Space Programs, 1959 (text only) 15 President’s Advisory Committee: Intro to Outer Space, 1958 (text only) 18 2 New York Times, October 4, 1957 “Soviet Fires Earth Satellite into Space” 3 Pravda, October 5, 1957 Announcement of the First Satellite On October 4, 1957, the Soviet Union launched the first earth orbiting satellite to support the scientific research effort undertaken by several nations during the 1957-1958 International Geophysical Year. The Soviets called the satellite "Sputnik" or "fellow traveler" and reported the achievement in a tersely worded press release issued by the official news agency, Tass, printed in the October 5, 1957, issue of Pravda. The United States had also been working on a scientific satellite program, Project Vanguard, but it had not yet launched a satellite. For several years scientific research and experimental design work have been conducted in the Soviet Union on the creation of artificial satellites of the earth. As already reported in the press, the first launching of the satellites in the USSR were planned for realization in accordance with the scientific research program of the International Geophysical Year. As a result of very intensive work by scientific research institutes and design bureaus the first artificial satellite in the world has been created.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Areas in Space
    RESPOND & AI Capacity Building Programme Office ISRO HQ, Bengaluru RESPOND & AI Capacity Building Programme Office ISRO HQ, Bengaluru RESEARCH AREAS IN SPACE A Document for Preparing Research Project Proposals RESPOND & AI Capacity Building Programme Office ISRO HQ, Bengaluru January 2021 Technical Guidance Dr. M A Paul, Associate Director, RESPOND & AI, ISRO HQ Technical Support and Compilation Smt Nirupama Tiwari, Sci/Engr SE, CBPO, ISRO HQ Shri K Mahesh, Sr. Asst, CBPO, ISRO HQ Technical Guidance Dr. M A Paul, Associate Director, RESPOND & AI, ISRO HQ For any queries please contact Director, Capacity Building Programme Office (CBPO) Technical Support and Compilation Indian Space Research Organisation HQ Smt Nirupama Tiwari, Sci/Engr SE, CBPO, ISRO HQ Department of Space Shri K Mahesh, Sr. Asst, CBPO, ISRO HQ Government of India Antariksh Bhavan New BEL Road For any queries please contact Bangalore 560094 E-mail: [email protected] Director, Capacity Building Programme Office (CBPO) Indian Space Research Organisation HQ Department of Space Associate Director, RESPOND & Academic Interface Government of India Indian Space Research Organisation HQ Antariksh Bhavan Department of Space New BEL Road Government of India Bangalore 560094 Antariksh Bhavan E-mail: [email protected] New BEL Road Bangalore 560094 Associate Director, RESPOND & Academic Interface E-mail: [email protected] Indian Space Research Organisation HQ Department of Space Government of India Antariksh Bhavan New BEL Road Bangalore 560094 E-mail: [email protected] CONTENTS
    [Show full text]
  • Asia's Space Race
    COMMENT SOCIAL SCIENCE Clearer ethical NEUROSCIENCE What goes on in PHILOSOPHY Two books OBITUARY Norman Ramsey, review guidance needed for the brain when we sniff a fine explore Buddhist views of hydrogen masers and online research p.174 red wine p.176 consciousness p.178 atomic clocks p.182 QUIRKY CHINA NEWS/REX FEATURES QUIRKY China’s unmanned spacecraft Shenzhou-8, launched in November, aims to dock with the Tiangong-1 space lab module launched in September. Asia’s space race Greater global cooperation is needed to avert the risk of further militarization, says James Clay Moltz. sian nations are in the midst of an abroad. Asian nations do not want to be seen well as lesser rivalries in Southeast Asia. unspoken space race. Although as ‘backward’ or, worse, as falling behind Unlike Europe and the cold-war-era United China has captured most of the their neighbours in science and technology. States and Soviet Union, Asia has no legacy Aattention, Japan, India, South Korea and So they watch one another’s space accom- of regional security co­operation, much less other countries in the region are also plishments closely, and try to match their arms control. expanding their space programmes. Unlike rivals at every turn. Asia’s emerging space race is spurring Europe, however, where countries are Tensions in Asian politics underlie today’s technological advances in the region. But co­operating within the European Space space competition. Long-festering historical competing national agendas are foster- Agency (ESA), Asian nations are going it and geopolitical feuds have created hostile ing scientific duplication, a failure to pool alone.
    [Show full text]
  • Syllabus ASEN 3036 Introduction to Human Space Flight
    Syllabus ASEN 3036 Introduction to Human Space Flight This course introduces students to the challenges and rewards of human space flight. Historical and current space programs and spacecraft will be discussed, along with the motivation, cost and rationale for human space exploration. An overview of the space environment will be presented in the context of what is needed to sustain human life and health, including physiological and psychological concerns, in a space habitat. Current events including space research will also be highlighted. Students will learn about the astronaut selection and training processes. Finally, anomalies, mission operations and future program directions, with some insight into career planning, will be covered. The emphasis on learning will be to understand the way humans approach the exploration of space and how such a bold endeavor affects us individually and as humans. Students will be encouraged to explore through readings and research different perspectives of spaceflight to include political, scientific, historical, economic, cultural, and social as well as to consider the impact on our future. Instructor: Jim Voss, Former Astronaut, Scholar in Residence, Roubos Chair Email: [email protected] Office: Engineering Center, ECAE 101 Prerequisites: none, open to all majors at any level Space Minor: This class is one of the elective courses for the CU Space Minor that is open to any undergraduate student from any major. For more information on the CU Space Minor see: http://www.colorado.edu/spaceminor/learn-more Textbook: Harrison, A., “Spacefaring - The Human Dimension”, University of California Press, Los Angeles, CA, 2001 Grading Breakdown: Homework 15%, Project 20%, Quizzes 30%, Exams 35% Course Website: http://www.colorado.edu/ASEN/asen3036/ Required Readings: • Harrison, A., “Spacefaring - The Human Dimension”, University of California Press, Los Angeles, CA, 2001 • NASA Strategic Plan, NASA Journey to Mars, various NASA reports • Various articles provided on the course website Suggested Readings: • O’Neill, G.
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons Learned from Mir — a Payload Perspective John J. Uri', Richard W
    Source of Acquisition NASA Johnson Space Center Lessons Learned from Mir — A Payload Perspective John J. Uri', Richard W. Nygren 2, Jeffery A. Cardenas3 1 ISS Payloads Office, NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, USA `NASA, retired, Houston, USA 3University Space Research Association, Houston, USA Abstract Among the principal objectives of the Phase 1 NASA/Mir program were for the United States to gain experience working with an international partner, to gain working experience in long-duration space flight, and to gain working experience in planning for and executing research on a long-duration space platform. The Phase 1 program was to provide to the US early experience prior to the construction and operation of the International Space Station (Phase 2 and 3). While it can be argued that Mir and ISS are different platforms and that programmatically Phase 1 and ISS are organized differently, it is also clear that many aspects of operating a long-duration research program are platform independent. This can be demonstrated by a review of lessons learned from Skylab, a US space station program of the mid-1970's, many of which were again "learned" on Mir and are being "learned" on ISS. Among these are optimum crew training strategies, on-orbit crew operations, ground support, medical operations and crew psychological support, and safety certification processes. Introduction The Soviet Union launched the first space station, called Salyut, in 1971. Through the 1970's and 1980's, the Soviets launched a series of stations of increasing complexity and sophistication, culminating with the Mir complex, which had an outstanding career as a long-duration human outpost from 1986 to 2001.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Civilian Space Policy Priorities and the Implication of Those Priorities
    = __=.;.1.&3=5&(*=41.(>=7.47.9.*8a= *+1*(9.438=/*=*&78=+9*7=5:93.0= *'47&-=_= 9.3*= 5*(.&1.89=.3=(.*3(*=&3)=*(-3414,>=41.(>= *'7:&7>=,`=,**3= 43,7*88.43&1= *8*&7(-=*7;.(*= 18/1**= <<<_(78_,4;= -.,0-= =*5479=+47=43,7*88 Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress __=.;.1.&3=5&(*=41.(>=7.47.9.*8a=*+1*(9.438=/*=*&78=+9*7=5:93.0= = :22&7>= The “space age” began on October 4, 1957, when the Soviet Union (USSR) launched Sputnik, the world’s first artificial satellite. Some U.S. policymakers, concerned about the USSR’s ability to launch a satellite, thought Sputnik might be an indication that the United States was trailing behind the USSR in science and technology. The Cold War also led some U.S. policymakers to perceive the Sputnik launch as a possible precursor to nuclear attack. In response to this “Sputnik moment,” the U.S. government undertook several policy actions, including the establishment of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), enhancement of research funding, and reformation of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education policy. Following the “Sputnik moment,” a set of fundamental factors gave “importance, urgency, and inevitability to the advancement of space technology,” according to an Eisenhower presidential committee. These four factors include the compelling need to explore and discover; national defense; prestige and confidence in the U.S. scientific, technological, industrial, and military systems; and scientific observation and experimentation to add to our knowledge and understanding of the Earth, solar system, and universe.
    [Show full text]