Quick viewing(Text Mode)

Space Weather Support for Manned Space Missions: Where We've

Space Weather Support for Manned Space Missions: Where We've

180 Space Support for Manned Space Disclaimer 160 Missions: Where We’ve Been, Where We

140 are Now, and Where We Need to Go

r

e

b 120 Although the facts speak for themselves, the spin placed on them m u and other opinions expressed here are those of the author and not

N t 100 o necessarily the position or policy of NASA.

p

s n 80 u

S

d e 60

h

t

o

o 40

m

S 20

0 1985 19 90 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Michael Golightly

User-Provider U.S. Manned Mission Scenarios . . .

Past Present Future (Cycle 22 Max) (Cycle 23 Max) (Cycle 24 Max) •Emphasis •Emphasis •Emphasis Ø Missions Ø International Space Station (ISS) Ø International Space Station (ISS) •Development •Development •Development Ø Space Station Freedom Ø Mars robotic exploration and Ø Manned Mars mission manned Mars mission technology Ø Lunar mission/base (?) development •Advanced Planning •Advanced Planning •Advanced Planning Ø Manned Mars Mission Ø Manned Mars Mission Ø ? Ø Lunar return mission Ø L2 Lagrangian point telescope servicing mission •Requires: •Requires: •Requires: Ø ~ 860 on-orbit hours per year Ø ~ 10600 on-orbit hours per year Ø > 8760 on-orbit hours per year Ø ~ 0 EVAs per year Ø ~ 26 EVAs per year Ø ~ 10-20 EVAs per year

1 . . . result in Concerns About Space . . . and Radiation Environment Enhance- Exposure . . . ments from Space Weather Activity . . .

Past Present Future Past Present Future (Cycle 22 Max) (Cycle 23 Max) (Cycle 24 Max) (Cycle 22 Max) (Cycle 23 Max) (Cycle 24 Max) •Sources •Sources •Sources •Solar particle events •Solar particle events •Solar particle events Ø Geomagnetically trapped p+ Ø Geomagnetically trapped p+ Ø Geomagnetically trapped p+ Ø Only a concern for the less Ø Concern for most missions Ø Concern for most NASA low- Ø GCR primaries Ø Geomagnetically trapped e- Ø GCR secondaries frequent high-inclination Shuttle orbit missions Ø SPE p+ Ø GCR secondaries Ø SPE p+ missions Ø Concern for any mission outside 1 + the Ø Secondaries, including n0, of Ø SPE p 1 minor importance Ø Secondaries, especially n0, of •Geomagnetic storms in •Geomagnetic storms in •Geomagnetic storms in significant importance conjunction with solar particle conjunction with solar particle conjunction with solar particle •Effects •Effects •Effects events events events Ø Acute radiation effects from high Ø Overall radiation risk greater than Ø Fully quantify all medical risks Ø Reduced geomagnetic cutoffs Ø Reduced geomagnetic cutoffs Ø Concern for most NASA low- Earth orbit missions exposure during a solar particle previously thought (cancer, CNS effects, etc.) Ø Concern for the less frequent mid- Ø Concern for most missions event – BEIR V Ø Biomedical methods to arrest/ and high-inclination Shuttle Ø Increased risk of cancer Ø Increased risk of cancer repair missions Ø High LET radiation unique effects Ø In-flight treatment methods •Outer electron belt •Outer electron belt •Outer electron belt (simple, low side-effects, etc) Ø Importance of genomic instability enhancements following enhancements following enhancements following Ø CNS effects (?) geomagnetic disturbances geomagnetic disturbances geomagnetic disturbances Ø Less of a concern for International •Exposures •Exposures •Exposures Ø Not a concern Ø Concern for International Space Ø Not recognized as a concern Station construction and servicing Space Station servicing EVAs Ø Average per crewman Ø Average per crewman Ø Average per crewman EVAs 1.6 mSv 10.9 mSv 41.5 mSv Ø Cumulative exposure Ø Cumulative exposure Ø Cumulative exposure 0.15 man-Sv/y 0.43 man-Sv/y ³ 1 man-Sv/y

. . . requiring Space Radiation Analysis Group . . . using Operational Space Weather Data . . . (SRAG) Mission Support . . .

Past Present Future Past Present Future (Cycle 22 Max) (Cycle 23 Max) (Cycle 24 Max) (Cycle 22 Max) (Cycle 23 Max) (Cycle 24 Max) •Concept •Concept •Concept •Space-based •Space-based •Space-based Ø Continuous on-console support Ø Quiet space weather conditions— Ø Routine space weather monitoring Ø GOES Ø GOES Ø GOES from launch through landing limited on-console support (4 is 60% automated, 40% human Ø TIROS/POESS Ø NPOESS Ø Routine space weather monitoring hours per day); on-call during all operator Ø SOHO Ø “” Program off-console periods is 0% automated, 100% human Ø Human support adapted to Ø ACE Ø ISS operator Ø Disturbed space weather mission parameters, position in Ø conditions—on-console support , communication during moderate to severe space capability with crew, etc. •Ground-based •Ground-based •Ground-based Ø a weather disturbances Ø Joint international support team Ø H-a Patrol (SEON) Ø H-a Patrol (SEON) H- Patrol (automated) Ø Ø Continuous on-console support (?) Ø Transverse magnetic field images Ø Transverse magnetic field images Magnetometer chains during EVAs (SEON) (SEON) Ø Thule (?) Ø Routine space weather monitoring Ø Magnetometer chains Ø Magnetometer chains Ø SoRBL is 10% automated, 90% human Ø Ø Thule neutron monitor operator Thule neutron monitor Ø Full-disk radio Ø Full-disk radio •Requires •Requires •Requires Ø On-console ~ 870 hours per year Ø On-console ~ 1640 hours per year Ø ? Ø On-call ~ 0 hours per year Ø On-call ~ 7120 hours per year •Cost Savings •Cost Savings Ø Baseline—requires 4 flight Ø Reduced number of flight controllers controllers Ø $960,000 per year

2 . . . Accessed from the NOAA Space . . . and viewed on Space Weather Data Environment Center . . . Displays . . .

Past Present Future Past Present Future (Cycle 22 Max) (Cycle 23 Max) (Cycle 24 Max) (Cycle 22 Max) (Cycle 23 Max) (Cycle 24 Max) •Telnet via modem •Direct data access via TCP/IP •Direct data access via TCP/IP •SELDADS II via modem •Direct access and viewing of •Improved direct access and Ø SELDADS II on a high-speed internet on a priority high-speed Ø Mostly text displays—data space weather data from viewing of space weather data Ø “capture” data scrolled to screen connection internet connection “captured” to local hard disk for custom developed applications and images from custom further use •FTP via modem •Web via high-speed internet •Wireless data access Ø SRAG Space Weather Monitor developed applications Ø Simple static line plots and Alarm + SPE --Real-Time •Teletype connection •Two way communications Ø NOAA IDS Ø Simple real-time line plots Ø SEC_Display •Fax •Anonymous FTP from anywhere Ø Integrate space weather data into Ø Only 1 plot available at a time •Populating databases/data other radiation environment •Paper products •? Ø Space weather data had to be re- objects with data obtained by displays entered or imported into other •Extracting data from XML- • broadcast applications for viewing anonymous FTP based Web pages and Ø Not used for manned mission •Solar images viewed offline Ø Solar Active Region Display support with FTS viewer application •Multiple datasets, historical displaying or using in customized applications Ø Only 1 viewable at a time and real-time data plots via Web Ø Require current space weather •Rely on displays built by others Web sites to convert HTML -based •Multiple image viewing via products to XML Web Ø Need for a community set of •Build unique, customized tag/attribute standards displays and applications •WAP compatible data sources •Cost Savings •Cost Savings •High fidelity simulated space Ø Baseline—0 programmers Ø Increased number of programmers weather data Ø -$360,000 per year Ø NOAA DSS

. . . as well as Space Weather Nowcasts and . . . as well as Space Weather Nowcasts and Forecasts . . . Forecasts (cont) . . .

Past Present Future Past Present Future (Cycle 22 Max) (Cycle 23 Max) (Cycle 24 Max) (Cycle 22 Max) (Cycle 23 Max) (Cycle 24 Max) • •Solar Particle Event •Solar Particle Event •Geomagnetic Disturbances •Geomagnetic Disturbances •Geomagnetic Disturbances Ø 3-day event probability forecast — Ø 3-day event probability forecast — Ø Improved 3-day event probability Ø 3-day event probability forecast from Ø Observation of potentially geo- Ø Improved prediction of magnetic subjective subjective forecast recurrence—subjective effective coronal holes storm on-set time from Ø Prediction of SPE based on “big- Ø Prediction of SPE based on “big- Ø Improved prediction of Ø No real capability to predict very Ø Indication of ejected material from improvements in interplanetary flare” occurrence flare” occurrence and/or CME interplanetary shock propagation large events “halo CMEs” shock propagation models Ø Some warning of shock formation observation (e.g., shock arrival) Ø General indication of ejected solar Ø 3-day event probability forecast from Ø Improved prediction of magnetic from radio bursts Ø Some warning of shock formation Ø Improved prediction of SPE based from observation of recurrence, “halo CMEs,” and storm intensity from improved Ø Model prediction of on-set time, from radio bursts following “big-flare” occurrence disappearing filaments coronal holes observations knowledge of CME properties peak flux, time of peak flux Ø Model prediction of on-set time, Ø Detection and tracking of event Ø Monitor progression of event from Ø Prediction of very large events— Ø Prediction of very large events—will Ø Subjective prediction of shock peak flux, time of peak flux progression from GOES particle magnetometers subjective depend on availability of CME arrival and magnitude Ø Subjective prediction of shock detectors monitoring Ø Detection and tracking of event arrival and magnitude Ø ?—additional observation, •Outer Electron Belt •Outer Electron Belt •Outer Electron Belt progression from GOES particle Ø Upstream detection of shock arrival monitoring, and forecast Enhancements Enhancements Enhancements detectors from ACE particle and solar improvements will depend on Ø No forecast capability Ø General forecast capability based on Ø Predict magnitude of Ø monitors availability of follow-on spacecraft Indication of very-high energy predicted geomagnetic disturbances- Ø to SOHO, TRACE, ACE, etc. Ø Monitor relativistic electron flux at enhancement as a function of particles from ground-level events Detection and tracking of event -subjective progression from GOES and ACE with GOES electron energy, including Ø particle detectors particle detectors Monitor relativistic electron flux at multiple events geosynchronous orbit with GOES Ø Indication of very-high energy Ø Predict enhancement as a function particles from ground-level events particle detectors of geographic/geomagnetic Ø Ineffective monitoring of electron position, including multiple belt enhancements in low-Earth orbit events Ø Enhancement decay constant as a function of energy, including multiple events

3 . . . while Radiation Conditions are Monitored . . . and viewed on Radiation at the Vehicle . . . Monitor Displays.

Past Present Future Past Present Future (Cycle 22 Max) (Cycle 23 Max) (Cycle 24 Max) (Cycle 22 Max) (Cycle 23 Max) (Cycle 24 Max) •Telemetered—real time •Telemetered—real time •Telemetered—real-time •None •ISS real-time dose/dose •Real-Time displays of Ø None Ø ISS TEPC Ø Second generation of ISS monitoring equivalent rate displays dose/dose equivalent rate instruments – Dose rate, Qavg Ø TEPC throughout vehicle – Common set supporting all member Ø EV/IV-CPDS groups? Ø IV-, EV-CPDS (dose rate only) Ø Use point external and internal – Count rate (proportional to dose Ø External omni-directional electron Ø Line and “tiger” plots measurements to extrapolate rate) flux monitor? Ø Single-point vehicle locations throughout vehicle Ø R-16 (Russian) Ø EVA crew-worn dosimeter only •Real-time displays of – Accumulated skin/depth dose Ø ? Ø Limited to low-rate “cyclic” data dose/dose equivalent from •Telemetered—non-real time •Telemetered—non-real time •Telemetered—non-real time •ISS and Space Shuttle non- inside EVA suit Ø real-time displays Ø None Ø Time-resolved ISS TEPC LET Crew dosimeter •On-board crew dosimeter spectra Ø Radiation area monitors Ø Bulk of ISS measurement data evaluation/data downlink Ø EV/IV-CPDS full particle Ø High-energy neutron spectrometer available only through batch •Cumulative medical risks using detection information Ø ? dumps Ø No telemetry available from all operational radiation Ø Bonner Ball Neutron Dosimeter monitoring data count-rate Space Shuttle Ø Displays tailored to individual •Non-Telemetered •Non-Telemetered •Non-Telemetered Ø Some ISS data will require too much processing to be available in crewmen Ø Pocket ion chambers Ø High rate dosimeters Ø ? real-time •Integrate radiation Ø Fixed area monitors (TLDs) Ø Fixed area monitors (TLDs) Ø Information used for periodic measurement data into existing Ø Crew exposure monitors (TLDs Ø Crew exposure monitors (TLDs) crew risk updates, model applications & CR-39) validations, and research/ Ø AF-Geospace Ø Point LET spectrum development

NOAA SEC’s Operational Space Weather . . . are an important component of Space Models . . . Weather Forecast & Prediction Accuracy . . .

Past Present Future Past Present Future (Cycle 22 Max) (Cycle 23 Max) (Cycle 24 Max) (Cycle 22 Max) (Cycle 23 Max) (Cycle 24 Max) •One simple model •Seven models •Undetermined •Solar Flares •Solar Flares •Solar Flares Ø PROTONS Ø PROTONS Ø CME Initiation Ø Poor Ø Moderate Ø Moderate to good Ø THERMAL PROTONS Ø CME Propagation Ø Experience remains a major factor Ø COSTELLO Ø New PROTON models in forecasting Ø Magnetospheric Specification Ø Plus current models •Solar Particle Events •Solar Particle Events—poor •Solar Particle Events— Ø Killer electron prediction Ø Poor but increasing with use of new Objectives: Ø ion vs. shock model Ø Forecast of event occurrence— observations. Ø Forecast of event occurrence— Ø Wang-Sheely Solar Wind Model 80 % Ø Forecast of event occurrence— 90% Ø SPE False alarm rate—>40% estimated 85% Ø False alarm rate—5 % Ø Magnitude forecast—three Ø SPE False alarm rate —30-40% Ø Magnitude forecast—one order orders of magnitude Ø Magnitude forecast—two of magnitude orders of magnitude •Geomagnetic storms and •Geomagnetic storms and •Geomagnetic storms and interplanetary shock waves interplanetary shock waves interplanetary shock waves Ø Poor Ø Significantly improving with Ø Depends on maintaining current use of new data experience and solar interplanetary observation platforms

4 . . . along with the NOAA SEC Solar NASA’s Involvement in Operational Space Forecasters’ Levels of Experience. Weather Support . . .

Past Present Future Past Present Future (Cycle 22 Max) (Cycle 23 Max) (Cycle 24 Max) (Cycle 22 Max) (Cycle 23 Max) (Cycle 24 Max) ³ 4 cycles = 0 ³ 4 cycles = 0 ³ 4 cycles = 0 •User only •User •User ³ 3 cycles = 0 ³ 3 cycles = 3 ³ 3 cycles = 0 Ø SRAG Ø SRAG ³ 2 cycles = 4 ³ 2 cycles = 1 ³ 2 cycles = 3 Ø Goddard space flight operations Ø Goddard space flight operations Ø ? ³ 1 cycle = 2 ³ 1 cycle = 4 ³ 1 cycle = 0 •Collaborator Ø Data processing hardware •Collaborator < 1 cycle = 7 < 1 cycle = 4 < 1 cycle = 7 (?) Ø Data dissemination system •Data supplier (?) development Ø Depends to large extent on the Total = 13 Total = 12 Total = 10 Ø Unique, customized data displays success of the “Living With a •Data supplier Star” proposal Total Experience: 14.6 cycles Total Experience: 18.9 cycles Total Experience: 8.6 cycles Ø SOHO •Partner with NOAA in joint Ø ACE space weather operations Ø WIND center (?) Ø IMAGE •Independent operational space Ø weather office (?)

Top 10 Space Weather Needs—NOAA SEC Summary Provider

• The general understanding of space weather phenomena has improved over the past solar cycle • The character of U.S. manned missions has changed significantly from the last • Our understanding of space weather concerns for manned missions has changed over the past solar cycle • The medical risks from space radiation exposure, including that from space weather events, is greater than thought a solar cycle ago • Space weather during this solar cycle has been monitored with the most capable fleet of spacecraft to date, but without new programs the level of monitoring will decrease by the next maximum • The availability of new data streams and models has out paced the current capability to ingest, reduce, and display the information--more work is needed to develop intelligent displays to help space weather forecasters and users to not only monitor space weather, but accurately predict its behavior in the near future

5 Summary (cont)

• Automation—to the extent possible —of space weather monitoring is critical to meet the expected needs of future manned missions within the constraints of tight budgets Ø Automation allows reduced on -console support (e.g., more on -call) with an expected cost savings over 10 years of $6 million • Space weather monitoring and forecasting over the past three solar cycles has resulted in a small group of highly-experienced space weather forecasters—the experience level of the space weather forecasters is expected to dramatically diminish by the next solar maximum • Obtaining real-time data from future research spacecraft (i.e., “Living With a operational space weather will likely require the operational community to provide the necessary communication infrastructure. Given the cost of providing continuous tracking coverage, this will probably require a multinational effort by space weather groups Ø Current tracking coverage of the ACE spacecraft for real-time solar wind data involves 7 different groups • Although science has produced significant improvements in the understanding of space weather phenomena and its effects on technical systems, from the NASA user perspective the biggest impact over the past decade are the technological advances (internet capabilities, more powerful computers) which have improved the access to and real-time analysis of critical space weather data.

6

Top View