Cassini Radio Science User's Guide
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Mission to Jupiter
This book attempts to convey the creativity, Project A History of the Galileo Jupiter: To Mission The Galileo mission to Jupiter explored leadership, and vision that were necessary for the an exciting new frontier, had a major impact mission’s success. It is a book about dedicated people on planetary science, and provided invaluable and their scientific and engineering achievements. lessons for the design of spacecraft. This The Galileo mission faced many significant problems. mission amassed so many scientific firsts and Some of the most brilliant accomplishments and key discoveries that it can truly be called one of “work-arounds” of the Galileo staff occurred the most impressive feats of exploration of the precisely when these challenges arose. Throughout 20th century. In the words of John Casani, the the mission, engineers and scientists found ways to original project manager of the mission, “Galileo keep the spacecraft operational from a distance of was a way of demonstrating . just what U.S. nearly half a billion miles, enabling one of the most technology was capable of doing.” An engineer impressive voyages of scientific discovery. on the Galileo team expressed more personal * * * * * sentiments when she said, “I had never been a Michael Meltzer is an environmental part of something with such great scope . To scientist who has been writing about science know that the whole world was watching and and technology for nearly 30 years. His books hoping with us that this would work. We were and articles have investigated topics that include doing something for all mankind.” designing solar houses, preventing pollution in When Galileo lifted off from Kennedy electroplating shops, catching salmon with sonar and Space Center on 18 October 1989, it began an radar, and developing a sensor for examining Space interplanetary voyage that took it to Venus, to Michael Meltzer Michael Shuttle engines. -
Mars Express Orbiter Radio Science
MaRS: Mars Express Orbiter Radio Science M. Pätzold1, F.M. Neubauer1, L. Carone1, A. Hagermann1, C. Stanzel1, B. Häusler2, S. Remus2, J. Selle2, D. Hagl2, D.P. Hinson3, R.A. Simpson3, G.L. Tyler3, S.W. Asmar4, W.I. Axford5, T. Hagfors5, J.-P. Barriot6, J.-C. Cerisier7, T. Imamura8, K.-I. Oyama8, P. Janle9, G. Kirchengast10 & V. Dehant11 1Institut für Geophysik und Meteorologie, Universität zu Köln, D-50923 Köln, Germany Email: [email protected] 2Institut für Raumfahrttechnik, Universität der Bundeswehr München, D-85577 Neubiberg, Germany 3Space, Telecommunication and Radio Science Laboratory, Dept. of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 95305, USA 4Jet Propulsion Laboratory, 4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, CA 91009, USA 5Max-Planck-Instuitut für Aeronomie, D-37189 Katlenburg-Lindau, Germany 6Observatoire Midi Pyrenees, F-31401 Toulouse, France 7Centre d’etude des Environnements Terrestre et Planetaires (CETP), F-94107 Saint-Maur, France 8Institute of Space & Astronautical Science (ISAS), Sagamihara, Japan 9Institut für Geowissenschaften, Abteilung Geophysik, Universität zu Kiel, D-24118 Kiel, Germany 10Institut für Meteorologie und Geophysik, Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz, A-8010 Graz, Austria 11Observatoire Royal de Belgique, B-1180 Bruxelles, Belgium The Mars Express Orbiter Radio Science (MaRS) experiment will employ radio occultation to (i) sound the neutral martian atmosphere to derive vertical density, pressure and temperature profiles as functions of height to resolutions better than 100 m, (ii) sound -
Envision Conference
Image credit: JAXA/DART/Damia Bouic NASA/GSFC/U. Arizona http://envisionvenus.eu http:/bit.ly/venus2020 M5/EnVision Project Cosmic Vision mission timeline M3 M1 M2 M5 M4 Image credit: http://envisionvenus.eu ESA Science - adapted from Wikipedia M5/EnVision : timeline Apr. 2016: Release of call for M5 mission Oct. 2016: EnVision proposal submitted Jan. 2017: 1st programmatic evaluation rejected Feb. 2017: EnVision scientific & programmatic evaluation resumes May 2018: ESA selects 3 M5 mission concepts to study Jun. 2018: ESA Science Directorate forms Science Study Team (SST) Nov 2018: CDF study (Phase 0) completed / EnVision Mission Definition Review (MDR) 2019-2020: Industrial phase A study (2 independent ESA contractors) Image credit M5/EnVision Project Mar. 2020 : EnVision Mission Consolidation Review (MCR) Dec. 2020 : EnVision Assessment Study Report (Yellow Book) Feb. 2021 : EnVision Mission Selection Review (MSR) http://envisionvenus.eu Image credit ESA Three very different M5 finalists "A high-energy survey of the early Universe, an infrared observatory to study the formation of stars, planets and galaxies, and a Venus orbiter are to be considered for ESA’s fifth medium class mission in its Cosmic Vision science programme, with a planned launch date in 2032." Spectroscopy from 12 to 230 μ Soft X-ray, X-gamma rays LEO orbit Image credit M5/EnVision Project M5/SPICA Project http://envisionvenus.eu M5/Theseus Project DAY 1 You are warmly invited to join •EnVision mission overview the international conference •Surface to discuss the scientific Magellan heritage investigations of ESA's DAY 2 EnVision mission. •Interior structure (radial : tidal, viscosity, crust, lithosphere structure) The conference will welcome •Activity detection all presentations related to DAY 3 the mission’s payload an its •Atmosphere VEx, Akatsuki Heritage science investigations. -
NASA's STEREO Mission
NASA’s STEREO Mission J.B. Gurman STEREO Project Scientist W.T. Thompson STEREO Chief Observer Solar Physics Laboratory, Helophysics Division NASA Goddard Space Flight Center 1 The STEREO Mission • Science and technology definition team report, 1997 December: • Understand the origin and consequences of coronal mass ejections (CMEs) • Two spacecraft in earth-leading and -lagging orbits near 1 AU (Solar Terrestrial Probe line) • “Beacon” mode for near-realtime warning of potentially geoeffective events 2 Level 1 Requirements • Understand the causes and mechanisms of CME initiation • Characterize the propagation of CMEs through the heliosphere • Discover the mechanisms and sites of energetic particle acceleration in the low corona and the interplanetary medium • Develop a 3D, time-dependent model of the magnetic topology, temperature, density, and velocity structure of the ambient solar wind 3 Implementation • Two nearly identical spacecraft launched by a single ELV • Bottom spacecraft in stack has adapter ring, some strengthening • Spacecraft built at Johns Hopkins University APL • Four science investigations 4 Scientific Instruments • S/WAVES - broad frequency response RF detection of Type II, III bursts • PLASTIC - solar wind plasma and suprathermal ion composition measurements • IMPACT - energetic electrons and ions, magnetic field • SECCHI - EUV, coronagraphs and heliospheric imagers (surface to 1.5 AU) 5 Instrument Hardware • PLASTIC IMPACT boom IMPACT boom SECCHI SCIP SECCHI HI S/WAVES 6 Orbit Design • Science team selected a separation -
Nustar Observatory Guide
NuSTAR Guest Observer Program NuSTAR Observatory Guide Version 3.2 (June 2016) NuSTAR Science Operations Center, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA NASA Goddard Spaceflight Center, Greenbelt, MD nustar.caltech.edu heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/docs/nustar/index.html i Revision History Revision Date Editor Comments D1,2,3 2014-08-01 NuSTAR SOC Initial draft 1.0 2014-08-15 NuSTAR GOF Release for AO-1 Addition of more information about CZT 2.0 2014-10-30 NuSTAR SOC detectors in section 3. 3.0 2015-09-24 NuSTAR SOC Update to section 4 for release of AO-2 Update for NuSTARDAS v1.6.0 release 3.1 2016-05-10 NuSTAR SOC (nusplitsc, Section 5) 3.2 2016-06-15 NuSTAR SOC Adjustment to section 9 ii Table of Contents Revision History ......................................................................................................................................................... ii 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 NuSTAR Program Organization ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 2. The NuSTAR observatory .................................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 NuSTAR Performance ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ -
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. -
+ New Horizons
Media Contacts NASA Headquarters Policy/Program Management Dwayne Brown New Horizons Nuclear Safety (202) 358-1726 [email protected] The Johns Hopkins University Mission Management Applied Physics Laboratory Spacecraft Operations Michael Buckley (240) 228-7536 or (443) 778-7536 [email protected] Southwest Research Institute Principal Investigator Institution Maria Martinez (210) 522-3305 [email protected] NASA Kennedy Space Center Launch Operations George Diller (321) 867-2468 [email protected] Lockheed Martin Space Systems Launch Vehicle Julie Andrews (321) 853-1567 [email protected] International Launch Services Launch Vehicle Fran Slimmer (571) 633-7462 [email protected] NEW HORIZONS Table of Contents Media Services Information ................................................................................................ 2 Quick Facts .............................................................................................................................. 3 Pluto at a Glance ...................................................................................................................... 5 Why Pluto and the Kuiper Belt? The Science of New Horizons ............................... 7 NASA’s New Frontiers Program ........................................................................................14 The Spacecraft ........................................................................................................................15 Science Payload ...............................................................................................................16 -
Collision Avoidance Operations in a Multi-Mission Environment
AIAA 2014-1745 SpaceOps Conferences 5-9 May 2014, Pasadena, CA Proceedings of the 2014 SpaceOps Conference, SpaceOps 2014 Conference Pasadena, CA, USA, May 5-9, 2014, Paper DRAFT ONLY AIAA 2014-1745. Collision Avoidance Operations in a Multi-Mission Environment Manfred Bester,1 Bryce Roberts,2 Mark Lewis,3 Jeremy Thorsness,4 Gregory Picard,5 Sabine Frey,6 Daniel Cosgrove,7 Jeffrey Marchese,8 Aaron Burgart,9 and William Craig10 Space Sciences Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-7450 With the increasing number of manmade object orbiting Earth, the probability for close encounters or on-orbit collisions is of great concern to spacecraft operators. The presence of debris clouds from various disintegration events amplifies these concerns, especially in low- Earth orbits. The University of California, Berkeley currently operates seven NASA spacecraft in various orbit regimes around the Earth and the Moon, and actively participates in collision avoidance operations. NASA Goddard Space Flight Center and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory provide conjunction analyses. In two cases, collision avoidance operations were executed to reduce the risks of on-orbit collisions. With one of the Earth orbiting THEMIS spacecraft, a small thrust maneuver was executed to increase the miss distance for a predicted close conjunction. For the NuSTAR observatory, an attitude maneuver was executed to minimize the cross section with respect to a particular conjunction geometry. Operations for these two events are presented as case studies. A number of experiences and lessons learned are included. Nomenclature dLong = geographic longitude increment ΔV = change in velocity dZgeo = geostationary orbit crossing distance increment i = inclination Pc = probability of collision R = geostationary radius RE = Earth radius σ = standard deviation Zgeo = geostationary orbit crossing distance I. -
2018: Aiaa-Space-Report
AIAA TEAM SPACE TRANSPORTATION DESIGN COMPETITION TEAM PERSEPHONE Submitted By: Chelsea Dalton Ashley Miller Ryan Decker Sahil Pathan Layne Droppers Joshua Prentice Zach Harmon Andrew Townsend Nicholas Malone Nicholas Wijaya Iowa State University Department of Aerospace Engineering May 10, 2018 TEAM PERSEPHONE Page I Iowa State University: Persephone Design Team Chelsea Dalton Ryan Decker Layne Droppers Zachary Harmon Trajectory & Propulsion Communications & Power Team Lead Thermal Systems AIAA ID #908154 AIAA ID #906791 AIAA ID #532184 AIAA ID #921129 Nicholas Malone Ashley Miller Sahil Pathan Joshua Prentice Orbit Design Science Science Science AIAA ID #921128 AIAA ID #922108 AIAA ID #761247 AIAA ID #922104 Andrew Townsend Nicholas Wijaya Structures & CAD Trajectory & Propulsion AIAA ID #820259 AIAA ID #644893 TEAM PERSEPHONE Page II Contents 1 Introduction & Problem Background2 1.1 Motivation & Background......................................2 1.2 Mission Definition..........................................3 2 Mission Overview 5 2.1 Trade Study Tools..........................................5 2.2 Mission Architecture.........................................6 2.3 Planetary Protection.........................................6 3 Science 8 3.1 Observations of Interest.......................................8 3.2 Goals.................................................9 3.3 Instrumentation............................................ 10 3.3.1 Visible and Infrared Imaging|Ralph............................ 11 3.3.2 Radio Science Subsystem................................. -
Mariner to Mercury, Venus and Mars
NASA Facts National Aeronautics and Space Administration Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Pasadena, CA 91109 Mariner to Mercury, Venus and Mars Between 1962 and late 1973, NASA’s Jet carry a host of scientific instruments. Some of the Propulsion Laboratory designed and built 10 space- instruments, such as cameras, would need to be point- craft named Mariner to explore the inner solar system ed at the target body it was studying. Other instru- -- visiting the planets Venus, Mars and Mercury for ments were non-directional and studied phenomena the first time, and returning to Venus and Mars for such as magnetic fields and charged particles. JPL additional close observations. The final mission in the engineers proposed to make the Mariners “three-axis- series, Mariner 10, flew past Venus before going on to stabilized,” meaning that unlike other space probes encounter Mercury, after which it returned to Mercury they would not spin. for a total of three flybys. The next-to-last, Mariner Each of the Mariner projects was designed to have 9, became the first ever to orbit another planet when two spacecraft launched on separate rockets, in case it rached Mars for about a year of mapping and mea- of difficulties with the nearly untried launch vehicles. surement. Mariner 1, Mariner 3, and Mariner 8 were in fact lost The Mariners were all relatively small robotic during launch, but their backups were successful. No explorers, each launched on an Atlas rocket with Mariners were lost in later flight to their destination either an Agena or Centaur upper-stage booster, and planets or before completing their scientific missions. -
Cassini RADAR Sequence Planning and Instrument Performance Richard D
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON GEOSCIENCE AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 47, NO. 6, JUNE 2009 1777 Cassini RADAR Sequence Planning and Instrument Performance Richard D. West, Yanhua Anderson, Rudy Boehmer, Leonardo Borgarelli, Philip Callahan, Charles Elachi, Yonggyu Gim, Gary Hamilton, Scott Hensley, Michael A. Janssen, William T. K. Johnson, Kathleen Kelleher, Ralph Lorenz, Steve Ostro, Member, IEEE, Ladislav Roth, Scott Shaffer, Bryan Stiles, Steve Wall, Lauren C. Wye, and Howard A. Zebker, Fellow, IEEE Abstract—The Cassini RADAR is a multimode instrument used the European Space Agency, and the Italian Space Agency to map the surface of Titan, the atmosphere of Saturn, the Saturn (ASI). Scientists and engineers from 17 different countries ring system, and to explore the properties of the icy satellites. have worked on the Cassini spacecraft and the Huygens probe. Four different active mode bandwidths and a passive radiometer The spacecraft was launched on October 15, 1997, and then mode provide a wide range of flexibility in taking measurements. The scatterometer mode is used for real aperture imaging of embarked on a seven-year cruise out to Saturn with flybys of Titan, high-altitude (around 20 000 km) synthetic aperture imag- Venus, the Earth, and Jupiter. The spacecraft entered Saturn ing of Titan and Iapetus, and long range (up to 700 000 km) orbit on July 1, 2004 with a successful orbit insertion burn. detection of disk integrated albedos for satellites in the Saturn This marked the start of an intensive four-year primary mis- system. Two SAR modes are used for high- and medium-resolution sion full of remote sensing observations by a dozen instru- (300–1000 m) imaging of Titan’s surface during close flybys. -
DSCOVR Magnetometer Observations Adam Szabo, Andriy Koval NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
DSCOVR Magnetometer Observations Adam Szabo, Andriy Koval NASA Goddard Space Flight Center 1 Locations of the Instruments Faraday Cup EPIC Omni Antenna Star Tracker Thruster Modules Digital Sun Sensor Electron Spectrometer +Z +X Magnetometer +Y 2 Goddard Fluxgate Magnetometer The Fluxgate Magnetometer measures the interplanetary vector magnetic field It is located at the tip of a 4.0 m boom to minimize the effect of spacecraft fields Requirement Value Method Performance Magnetometer Range 0.1-100 nT Test 0.004-65,500 nT Accuracy +/- 1 nT Measured +/- 0.2 nT Cadence 1 min Measured 50 vector/sec 3 Pre-flight Calibration • Determined the magnetometer zero levels, scale factors, and magnetometer orthogonalization matrix. • Determined the spacecraft generated magnetic fields – Subsystem level magnetic tests. Reaction wheels, major source of dynamic field, were shielded – Spacecraft unpowered magnetic test in the GSFC 40’ magnetic facility In-Flight Boom Deployment • Nominal deployment on 2/15/15, seen as 4.4 rotations in the magnetometer components Mostly spacecraft Boom deployment Interplanetary magnetic field induced fields 5 Alfven Waves in the Solar Wind • The solar wind contains magnetic field rotations that preserve the magnitude of the field, so called Alfven waves. • Alfven waves are ubiquitous and are possible to identify with automated routines. • Systematic deviations from a constant field magnitude during these waves are an indication of spacecraft induced offsets. • Minimizing the deviations with slowly changing offsets allows in-flight calibrations. 6 In-Flight Magnetometer Calibrations Z Magnetometer Zero Offsets X • X axis Roll and Z axis Slew data is Y consistent with ground calibration estimates X • Independent zero offset determination by rolls, slews and using solar wind Alfvenicity give consistent values Z • Time variation is consistent with yearly orbital change.