On-Orbit Serviceability of Space System Architectures

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

On-Orbit Serviceability of Space System Architectures ON-ORBIT SERVICEABILITY OF SPACE SYSTEM ARCHITECTURES by Matthew G. Richards S.B. Aeronautics and Astronautics – Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2004 Submitted to the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics and the Engineering Systems Division in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the degrees of Master of Science in AERONAUTICS AND ASTRONAUTICS and Master of Science in TECHNOLOGY AND POLICY at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology June 2006 © 2006 Massachusetts Institute of Technology All rights reserved Signature of Author……………………………………………………….………………………................. Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics Engineering Systems Division May 19, 2006 Certified by…………………………………………………….…………………………………................. Daniel E. Hastings Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics and Engineering Systems Dean for Undergraduate Education Thesis Supervisor Certified by…………………………………………………….…………………………………................. Donna H. Rhodes Senior Lecturer of Engineering Systems Thesis Supervisor Accepted by…………………………………...……………………………………………………………... Dava J. Newman Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics and Engineering Systems Director, Technology and Policy Program Accepted by……………...…………………………………………………………………………………... Jaime Peraire Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics Chair, Committee on Graduate Students 2 ON-ORBIT SERVICEABILITY OF SPACE SYSTEM ARCHITECTURES by Matthew G. Richards Submitted to the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics and Engineering Systems Division on May 19, 2006 in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degrees of Master of Science in Aeronautics and Astronautics and Master of Science in Technology and Policy. Abstract On-orbit servicing is the process of improving a space-based capability through a combination of in-orbit activities which may include inspection; rendezvous and docking; and value-added modifications to a satellite’s position, orientation, and operational status. As a means to extend the useful life or operational flexibility of spacecraft, on-orbit servicing constitutes one pathway to a responsive space enterprise. Following launch, traditional satellite operations are tightly constrained by an inability to access the orbiting vehicle. With the exception of software upgrades from ground controllers, operators are wedded to supporting payload technologies that become rapidly obsolete and to bus structures that deform during the stress of launch and degrade in the harsh environment of space. On-orbit servicing offers satellite operators an option for maintaining or improving space-based capabilities without launching a new spacecraft. Numerous studies have been performed on on-orbit servicing, particularly regarding the architecture of the servicing provider. Several customer valuation case studies have also been performed to identify the economic case (or lack thereof) for different categories of servicing missions. Little work, however, has been done to analyze the tradespace of potential on-orbit servicing customers—a global analysis of operational satellites currently orbiting the Earth. The goal of this research is to develop and test a methodology to assess the physical amenability of satellites currently in operation to on-orbit servicing. As defined here, physical amenability of a target satellite, or “serviceability,” refers to the relative complexity required of a teleoperated or autonomously controlled robotic vehicle to accomplish on-orbit servicing. A three-step process is followed to perform serviceability assessments. First, a taxonomy of space systems is constructed to add structure to the problem and to identify satellite attributes that drive servicing mission complexity. Second, a methodology is proposed to assess serviceability across the four servicing activities of rendezvous, acquire, access, and service. This includes development of an agent-based model based on orbital transfers as well as a generalized framework in which serviceability is decomposed into four elements: (1) knowledge, (2) scale, (3) precision, and (4) timing. Third, the value of architecture frameworks and systems engineering modeling languages for conducting serviceability assessments is explored through the development of a discrete event simulation of the Hubble Space Telescope. The thesis concludes with prescriptive technical considerations for designing serviceable satellites and a discussion of the political, legal, and financial challenges facing servicing providers. Thesis Supervisors: Daniel E. Hastings, Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics and Engineering Systems Donna H. Rhodes, Senior Lecturer of Engineering Systems 3 To God for the opportunity, my family for the confidence, and Dr. Wheelon for the inspiration. 4 Acknowledgements Since the first “intellectual scrubbing” I witnessed in one of his group research meetings, I have been fascinated by Professor Hastings, his enjoyable leadership style and his thirst for meeting the challenges of our time. From the freedom he granted me to pursue on-orbit servicing to his rich stories of “fighting fires” down in Washington D.C., I was always challenged and motivated. Working as his research assistant is an intellectual treat and adventure; I look forward to the sequel as I pursue the Ph.D. As my research advisor for the Lean Aerospace Initiative (LAI), Donna Rhodes kept my mind well- nourished with the systems engineering tools and processes that enabled this thesis from both an intellectual and practical perspective. I thank her for her ideas and encouragement. I am also in debt to Professor Weigel, who served as my academic advisor during my first year. As a five-time Shuttle astronaut and Hubble mechanic, I thank Professor Hoffman for his insights as well as his awesome contributions to the practice of on-orbit servicing. This work would not have been possible without the support of the students in Professor Hastings’ research group. Between juggling a wife, four kids, and real options theory, Jason Bartolomei has been a role model to me for every aspect of life: professional, personal, and spiritual. With his quirky sense of humor and an aptitude for making profound insights at the least probable times, Spencer Lewis was a pleasure to turn to during late nights in lab. In addition to being a close friend, Andrew Long is a fellow believer in on-orbit servicing; his Master’s thesis provided a foundation for my own research. From the purposeful mindset he instilled in our research group to the lab he set up, I am grateful to have Adam Ross as one of the “architects” of my graduate school experience, and I look forward to working with him in the future. Finally, Nirav Shah never ceases to amaze me with his casual mastery of such a diverse range of topics; his contributions to this thesis, particularly the modeling activities, are immense. Thank you, Nirav, for making this research possible. Having worked with Michelle McVey and Phil Springmann at DARPA on space tugs, their fingerprints are all over this thesis. Thank you also to Phil for his critical feedback on my work. It would be impossible to acknowledge everyone who has influenced my thinking over my education at MIT, the University of Cambridge, and Campbell Hall School. I would like to thank fellow students David Broniatowski, Heidi Davidz, Nicole Jordan, Pedzi Makumbe, Charlotte Mathieu, Sam Prentice, Darlene Utter, Katie Walter, and Roland Weibel for contributing to my graduate school experience. Having begun my academic research career with LAI in January 2002, I am grateful to Professor Murman, Professor Nightingale, Kirk Bozdogan, Hugh McManus, Eric Rebentisch, and Tom Shields who have each supervised me on various projects. Thanks are due to Rob Perrons, my research supervisor in Cambridge, for his insights regarding servicing offshore oil platforms. I would also like to thank all of my teachers over the years, particularly Gay Seltzer, who reviewed a draft of this thesis. Amy Marshall deserves credit for keeping me sane, both on and off the basketball court. I thank her for her spirit, charm, and contagious enthusiasm for life. I thank my family for their unwavering support and encouragement. To my Dad for his feedback on just about every document that I have ever written, to my Mom for always making me do my best, and to my brother, Michael, for teaching me what it truly means to succeed; thank you for your contributions to my education. 5 Table of Contents ABSTRACT................................................................................................................................... 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................................... 5 TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................................. 6 LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................................... 10 LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................... 12 ACRONYMS............................................................................................................................... 13 1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................... 15 1.1 BACKGROUND................................................................................................................ 17 1.1.1 Complex Systems Problems
Recommended publications
  • Astrodynamics
    Politecnico di Torino SEEDS SpacE Exploration and Development Systems Astrodynamics II Edition 2006 - 07 - Ver. 2.0.1 Author: Guido Colasurdo Dipartimento di Energetica Teacher: Giulio Avanzini Dipartimento di Ingegneria Aeronautica e Spaziale e-mail: giulio.avanzini@polito.it Contents 1 Two–Body Orbital Mechanics 1 1.1 BirthofAstrodynamics: Kepler’sLaws. ......... 1 1.2 Newton’sLawsofMotion ............................ ... 2 1.3 Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation . ......... 3 1.4 The n–BodyProblem ................................. 4 1.5 Equation of Motion in the Two-Body Problem . ....... 5 1.6 PotentialEnergy ................................. ... 6 1.7 ConstantsoftheMotion . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... 7 1.8 TrajectoryEquation .............................. .... 8 1.9 ConicSections ................................... 8 1.10 Relating Energy and Semi-major Axis . ........ 9 2 Two-Dimensional Analysis of Motion 11 2.1 ReferenceFrames................................. 11 2.2 Velocity and acceleration components . ......... 12 2.3 First-Order Scalar Equations of Motion . ......... 12 2.4 PerifocalReferenceFrame . ...... 13 2.5 FlightPathAngle ................................. 14 2.6 EllipticalOrbits................................ ..... 15 2.6.1 Geometry of an Elliptical Orbit . ..... 15 2.6.2 Period of an Elliptical Orbit . ..... 16 2.7 Time–of–Flight on the Elliptical Orbit . .......... 16 2.8 Extensiontohyperbolaandparabola. ........ 18 2.9 Circular and Escape Velocity, Hyperbolic Excess Speed . .............. 18 2.10 CosmicVelocities
    [Show full text]
  • Apollo 8 (AS-503) Mission Operation Report
    Pre- Launch Mission Operation Report No. M-932-68-08 MEMORANDUM To: A/Acting Administrator /7/4-7dY& 5/ From: MA/Apollo Program Director Subject: Apollo 8 Mission (AS-503) No earlier than 21 December 1968, we plan to launch the next Apollo/Saturn V mission, Apollo 8. This will be the first manned Saturn V flight, the second flight of a manned Apollo spacecraft and the first manned Apollo flight to the lunar vicinity. The purpose of this mission is to demonstrate: crew/space vehicle/mission support facilities performance during a manned Saturn V mission with CSM, and performance of nominal and selected backup lunar orbital mission activities including translunar injection, CSM navigation, communications and midcourse corrections, and CSM consumables assessment and passive thermal control. Mission duration is planned for approximately six days and three hours. The launch will be the third Saturn V from.Launch Complex 39 at Kennedy Space Center. The launch window opens at 7~51 EST 21 December and closes for December at 18:20 EST 27 December, Daily windows during this period vary in duration from 4-l/2 hours to approximately l-1/2 hours. The nominal mission will comprise: ascent to parking orbit; translunar injection by the S-IVB; CSM separation from S-IVB; translunar coast with required midcourse corrections; lunar orbit insertion and circularization; up to 10 lunar orbits; transearth injection, transearth coast and required midcourse corrections; reentry and splashdown. Recovery will be in the Pacific recovery area with exact location dependent on launch conditions. Apollo Program Director APPROVAL: /associate Administrator for / Manned Space Flight l_l ,.
    [Show full text]
  • Dod Space Technology Guide
    Foreword Space-based capabilities are integral to the U.S.’s national security operational doctrines and processes. Such capa- bilities as reliable, real-time high-bandwidth communica- tions can provide an invaluable combat advantage in terms of clarity of command intentions and flexibility in the face of operational changes. Satellite-generated knowledge of enemy dispositions and movements can be and has been exploited by U.S. and allied commanders to achieve deci- sive victories. Precision navigation and weather data from space permit optimal force disposition, maneuver, decision- making, and responsiveness. At the same time, space systems focused on strategic nuclear assets have enabled the National Command Authorities to act with confidence during times of crisis, secure in their understanding of the strategic force postures. Access to space and the advantages deriving from operat- ing in space are being affected by technological progress If our Armed Forces are to be throughout the world. As in other areas of technology, the faster, more lethal, and more precise in 2020 advantages our military derives from its uses of space are than they are today, we must continue to dynamic. Current space capabilities derive from prior invest in and develop new military capabilities. decades of technology development and application. Joint Vision 2020 Future capabilities will depend on space technology programs of today. Thus, continuing investment in space technologies is needed to maintain the “full spectrum dominance” called for by Joint Vision 2010 and 2020, and to protect freedom of access to space by all law-abiding nations. Trends in the availability and directions of technology clearly suggest that the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Information Summaries
    TIROS 8 12/21/63 Delta-22 TIROS-H (A-53) 17B S National Aeronautics and TIROS 9 1/22/65 Delta-28 TIROS-I (A-54) 17A S Space Administration TIROS Operational 2TIROS 10 7/1/65 Delta-32 OT-1 17B S John F. Kennedy Space Center 2ESSA 1 2/3/66 Delta-36 OT-3 (TOS) 17A S Information Summaries 2 2 ESSA 2 2/28/66 Delta-37 OT-2 (TOS) 17B S 2ESSA 3 10/2/66 2Delta-41 TOS-A 1SLC-2E S PMS 031 (KSC) OSO (Orbiting Solar Observatories) Lunar and Planetary 2ESSA 4 1/26/67 2Delta-45 TOS-B 1SLC-2E S June 1999 OSO 1 3/7/62 Delta-8 OSO-A (S-16) 17A S 2ESSA 5 4/20/67 2Delta-48 TOS-C 1SLC-2E S OSO 2 2/3/65 Delta-29 OSO-B2 (S-17) 17B S Mission Launch Launch Payload Launch 2ESSA 6 11/10/67 2Delta-54 TOS-D 1SLC-2E S OSO 8/25/65 Delta-33 OSO-C 17B U Name Date Vehicle Code Pad Results 2ESSA 7 8/16/68 2Delta-58 TOS-E 1SLC-2E S OSO 3 3/8/67 Delta-46 OSO-E1 17A S 2ESSA 8 12/15/68 2Delta-62 TOS-F 1SLC-2E S OSO 4 10/18/67 Delta-53 OSO-D 17B S PIONEER (Lunar) 2ESSA 9 2/26/69 2Delta-67 TOS-G 17B S OSO 5 1/22/69 Delta-64 OSO-F 17B S Pioneer 1 10/11/58 Thor-Able-1 –– 17A U Major NASA 2 1 OSO 6/PAC 8/9/69 Delta-72 OSO-G/PAC 17A S Pioneer 2 11/8/58 Thor-Able-2 –– 17A U IMPROVED TIROS OPERATIONAL 2 1 OSO 7/TETR 3 9/29/71 Delta-85 OSO-H/TETR-D 17A S Pioneer 3 12/6/58 Juno II AM-11 –– 5 U 3ITOS 1/OSCAR 5 1/23/70 2Delta-76 1TIROS-M/OSCAR 1SLC-2W S 2 OSO 8 6/21/75 Delta-112 OSO-1 17B S Pioneer 4 3/3/59 Juno II AM-14 –– 5 S 3NOAA 1 12/11/70 2Delta-81 ITOS-A 1SLC-2W S Launches Pioneer 11/26/59 Atlas-Able-1 –– 14 U 3ITOS 10/21/71 2Delta-86 ITOS-B 1SLC-2E U OGO (Orbiting Geophysical
    [Show full text]
  • US National Security and Military/Commercial
    COMMERCIAL SPACE INSURANCE VOLUME II: Chapter 8/Summary he space insurance aspect of the Intelsat 708 launch failure focuses on the exchange of controlled technical information within the insurance community. Insurance underwriters and reinsurers for the Apstar 1A satellite program — the next scheduled T satellite to be launched on the Long March 3B after the Intelsat 708 failure — were concerned about the reliability of the Long March rocket, and the fate of future launch insurance programs in the PRC. Immediately after the Intelsat 708 launch failure, space insurance under- writers for the Apstar 1A insurance program pressured the PRC to create an international and Independent Review Committee (IRC). These underwriters and reinsurers insisted on this arrangement to ensure that an adequate assessment of the risks of future Long March rocket launches was made. Representatives from J & H Marsh & McLennan, an international space insurance brokerage firm, were adamant about obtaining a report from the Independent Review Committee for the benefit of the reinsurers of the Apstar 1A satellite insurance program. Members of the space insurance community were invit- ed to attend a meeting on April 15 and 16, 1996, in the PRC. The purpose of the meet- ing was to build confidence in the Long March rocket, and to discuss the status of the Apstar 1A insurance program. The space insurance acquisition and underwriting process includes the dis- semination of technical information, the consideration of market conditions, capac- ity, and participants, and the involvement of insurance brokers, underwriters, and rein- surers. This chapter identifies several issues relating to procedures for the disclosure and handling of sensitive information by the insurance community.
    [Show full text]
  • Detecting, Tracking and Imaging Space Debris
    r bulletin 109 — february 2002 Detecting, Tracking and Imaging Space Debris D. Mehrholz, L. Leushacke FGAN Research Institute for High-Frequency Physics and Radar Techniques, Wachtberg, Germany W. Flury, R. Jehn, H. Klinkrad, M. Landgraf European Space Operations Centre (ESOC), Darmstadt, Germany Earth’s space-debris environment tracked, with estimates for the number of Today’s man-made space-debris environment objects larger than 1 cm ranging from 100 000 has been created by the space activities to 200 000. that have taken place since Sputnik’s launch in 1957. There have been more than 4000 The sources of this debris are normal launch rocket launches since then, as well as many operations (Fig. 2), certain operations in space, other related debris-generating occurrences fragmentations as a result of explosions and such as more than 150 in-orbit fragmentation collisions in space, firings of satellite solid- events. rocket motors, material ageing effects, and leaking thermal-control systems. Solid-rocket Among the more than 8700 objects larger than 10 cm in Earth orbits, motors use aluminium as a catalyst (about 15% only about 6% are operational satellites and the remainder is space by mass) and when burning they emit debris. Europe currently has no operational space surveillance aluminium-oxide particles typically 1 to 10 system, but a powerful radar facility for the detection and tracking of microns in size. In addition, centimetre-sized space debris and the imaging of space objects is available in the form objects are formed by metallic aluminium melts, of the 34 m dish radar at the Research Establishment for Applied called ‘slag’.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Issues Related to Spacecraft Vibration During Ascent
    Human Issues related to Spacecraft Vibration during Ascent Consultant Report to the Constellation Program Standing Review Board Jonathan B. Clark M.D., M.P.H. Suite NA 425 One Baylor Plaza Baylor College of Medicine Houston TX 77030-3498 1731 Sunset Blvd Houston TX 77005 713 859 1381 281 989 8721 Jclark1@bcm.edu jbclark@pol.net Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not reflect the views of the National Space Biomedical Research Institute (NSBRI), Baylor College of Medicine (BCM), the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), or the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Human Issues related to Spacecraft Vibration during Ascent Consultant Report to the Constellation Program Standing Review Board Jonathan B. Clark M.D., M.P.H. Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not reflect the views of the National Space Biomedical Research Institute (NSBRI), Baylor College of Medicine (BCM), the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), or the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Pogo in Liquid Fueled Rocket Motors The pogo phenomenon, or fuel pump inlet pressure fluctuation/ cavitation due to tuning feed line resonant frequencies was a major concern in the early space program. Pump tests showed that as inlet pressures were reduced toward cavitation, the pump started acting as an amplifier, causing large oscillations in the thrust chamber pressure. As the rocket engine thrust develops, liquid propellant is cyclically forced into the turbopump. This fluctuating fluid pressure is converted into an unintended and variable increase in engine thrust, with the net effect being longitudinal axis vibration that could result in spacecraft structural failure.
    [Show full text]
  • Evolution of the Rendezvous-Maneuver Plan for Lunar-Landing Missions
    NASA TECHNICAL NOTE NASA TN D-7388 00 00 APOLLO EXPERIENCE REPORT - EVOLUTION OF THE RENDEZVOUS-MANEUVER PLAN FOR LUNAR-LANDING MISSIONS by Jumes D. Alexunder und Robert We Becker Lyndon B, Johnson Spuce Center ffoaston, Texus 77058 NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, D. C. AUGUST 1973 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No, 3. Recipient's Catalog No. NASA TN D-7388 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date APOLLOEXPERIENCEREPORT August 1973 EVOLUTIONOFTHERENDEZVOUS-MANEUVERPLAN 6. Performing Organizatlon Code FOR THE LUNAR-LANDING MISSIONS 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. James D. Alexander and Robert W. Becker, JSC JSC S-334 10. Work Unit No. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address I - 924-22-20- 00- 72 Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center 11. Contract or Grant No. Houston, Texas 77058 13. Type of Report and Period Covered 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Technical Note I National Aeronautics and Space Administration 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington, D. C. 20546 I 15. Supplementary Notes The JSC Director waived the use of the International System of Units (SI) for this Apollo Experience I Report because, in his judgment, the use of SI units would impair the usefulness of the report or I I result in excessive cost. 16. Abstract The evolution of the nominal rendezvous-maneuver plan for the lunar landing missions is presented along with a summary of the significant developments for the lunar module abort and rescue plan. A general discussion of the rendezvous dispersion analysis that was conducted in support of both the nominal and contingency rendezvous planning is included.
    [Show full text]
  • AMC-14 MO Final.Qxp 2/29/2008 1:15 PM Page 1
    AMC-14 MO final.qxp 2/29/2008 1:15 PM Page 1 THE VEHICLE THE SATELLITE PROTON HISTORY PROTON www.ilslaunch.com Lead designer was Vladimir Chelomei, DESCRIPTION who designed it with the intention of creating a powerful rocket for both TOTAL HEIGHT military payloads and as a high- 56.2 m (184 ft) performance ICBM. The program GROSS LIFTOFF was changed, and the rocket WEIGHT was developed exclusively for 691,272 kg launching spacecraft. (1,523,565 lbm) First named UR-500, but PROPELLANT UDMH and N O adopted the name 2 4 “Proton,” which also was INITIAL LAUNCH the name of the first July 16, 1965 three payloads Proton-1 Spacecraft launched. PAYLOAD FAIRINGS Proton launched Russian There are multiple payload fair- ing designs presently qualified for interplanetary missions to flight, including standard commer- the Moon, Venus, Mars, and cial payload fairings developed specif- Halley’s Comet. ically to meet the needs of our Western customers. Proton launched the Salyut space stations, the Mir BREEZE M UPPER STAGE SATELLITE OPERATOR core segment and both The Breeze M is powered by one pump-fed gim- SES AMERICOM baled main engine that develops thrust of 19.6 kN the Zarya and Zvezda www.ses-americom.com (4,400 lbf). The Breeze M is composed of a central core modules for today’s and a jettisonable additional propellant tank. Inert mass of the SATELLITE MANUFACTURER International Space stage at liftoff is approximately 2,370 kg (5,225 lbm). The quan- Lockheed Martin Commercial Space Systems Station. tity of propellant carried is dependent on specific mission require- www.lmcommercialspace.com ments and is varied to maximize mission performance.
    [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]
  • Gemini 4 an Astronaut Steps Into the Void
    springer.com Popular Science : Popular Science in Astronomy Shayler, David J. Gemini 4 An Astronaut Steps into the Void Details the first American spacewalk in a leap forward from the Mercury program Follows each detail of Gemini's extended duration flight, NASA's first, relying extensively on archives Continues the Pioneers in Early Spaceflight series which looks one-by-one at the Mercury and Gemini flights The flight of Gemini 4 in June 1965 was conducted barely four years after the first Americans flew in space. It was a bold step by NASA to accomplish the first American spacewalk and to extend the U.S. flight duration record to four days. This would be double the experience gained from the six Mercury missions combined. This daring mission was the first to be directed from Springer the new Mission Control at the Manned Spacecraft Center near Houston, Texas. It also revealed 1st ed. 2018, XXV, 378 p. that: Working outside the spacecraft would require further study. Developing the techniques to 1st 81 illus., 46 illus. in color. rendezvous with another object in space would not be as straightforward as NASA had hoped. edition Living in a small spacecraft for several days was a challenging but necessary step in the quest for even longer flights.Despite the risks, the gamble that astronauts Jim McDivitt and Ed White undertook paid off. Gemini 4 gave NASA the confidence to attempt an even longer flight the Printed book next time. That next mission would simulate the planned eight-day duration of an Apollo lunar Softcover voyage.
    [Show full text]
  • Thesis Submitted to Florida Institute of Technology in Partial Fulfllment of the Requirements for the Degree Of
    Dynamics of Spacecraft Orbital Refueling by Casey Clark Bachelor of Aerospace Engineering Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering College of Engineering 2016 A thesis submitted to Florida Institute of Technology in partial fulfllment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Aerospace Engineering Melbourne, Florida July, 2018 ⃝c Copyright 2018 Casey Clark All Rights Reserved The author grants permission to make single copies. We the undersigned committee hereby approve the attached thesis Dynamics of Spacecraft Orbital Refueling by Casey Clark Dr. Tiauw Go, Sc.D. Associate Professor. Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering Committee Chair Dr. Jay Kovats, Ph.D. Associate Professor Mathematics Outside Committee Member Dr. Markus Wilde, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering Committee Member Dr. Hamid Hefazi, Ph.D. Professor and Department Head Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering ABSTRACT Title: Dynamics of Spacecraft Orbital Refueling Author: Casey Clark Major Advisor: Dr. Tiauw Go, Sc.D. A quantitative collation of relevant parameters for successfully completed exper- imental on-orbit fuid transfers and anticipated orbital refueling future missions is performed. The dynamics of connected satellites sustaining fuel transfer are derived by treating the connected spacecraft as a rigid body and including an in- ternal mass fow rate. An orbital refueling results in a time-varying local center of mass related to the connected spacecraft. This is accounted for by incorporating a constant mass fow rate in the inertia tensor. Simulations of the equations of motion are performed using the values of the parameters of authentic missions in an endeavor to provide conclusions regarding the efect of an internal mass transfer on the attitude of refueling spacecraft.
    [Show full text]