DOCSLIB.ORG

High Performance Mars Ascent Vehicles, Earth Return Vehicles and “All-Up” Launch Strategy for Low Cost Sample Return

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
High Performance Mars Ascent Vehicles, Earth Return Vehicles and “All-Up” Launch Strategy for Low Cost Sample Return Concepts and Approaches for Mars Exploration (2012) 4356.pdf HIGH PERFORMANCE MARS ASCENT VEHICLES, EARTH RETURN VEHICLES AND “ALL-UP” LAUNCH STRATEGY FOR LOW COST SAMPLE RETURN. L. G. Lemke1, C. R. Stoker1, B. J. Glass1, J. S. Karcz1, J. V. Bowles1, A. A. Gonzales1, S. Davis2 . 1NASA Ames Research Center, 2SpaceX Company. Introduction: Robotic missions to return carefully straints force a complex architecture to be fractionated selected samples of Mars atmosphere, regolith, and into smaller pieces and implemented over a longer rock have been actively studied and advocated by time than might otherwise be desireable. One conse- NASA for at least the last 15 years and remain a very quence of this mission fractionation is that the DSA high priority objective of both the Science Mission uses a small (≈ 300 kg) Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) Directorate (SMD) and the Human Exploration and with a ΔV of ≈ 4 km/s—just enough to attain low Mars Operations Mission Directorate (HEOMD) programs. orbit. This, in turn requires MOR to place the sample As a practical matter, such missions are intrinsically container in a hermetically sealed Earth Return Vehicle among the most complex robotic planetary missions (ERV) before departure toward Earth. The Mars Or- that can be engineered. The current Decadal Survey biter in the DSA is itself a large and highly capable Architecture (DSA) incorporates virtually every tech- spacecraft requiring a dedicated launch and mission nical capability in the robotic spaceflight repertoire— control. atmospheric Entry Descent and Landing (EDL) at A Johnson Space Center (JSC) study con- Mars, Mars surface mobility, subsurface sample acqui- ducted by the then Office of Exploration [1] examined sition, autonomous sample handling for planetary pro- the cost and risk benefits of MSR alternatives not re- tection, Mars surface rendezvous with rovers, launch quiring MOR. One of the conclusions is that an archi- from Mars’ surface to orbit, Mars Orbit Rendezvous tecture involving MOR is likely to be one of the more (MOR), and Earth EDL from high speed approach (≈ expensive and risky choices compared to an architec- 12.5 km/s). The need to utilize all or nearly all, these ture that does not. In order to implement an MSR mis- capabilities to return just one sample container is un- sion without MOR, it is necessary to land a highly ca- doubtedly a major driver for the risk and cost of sam- pable MAV + ERV spacecraft stack—one capable of ple return architectures. Even a minimal Mars sample carrying the sample container all the way from Mars’ return mission will necessarily have a large number of surface to Earth orbit (an “Earth-Direct” architecture). moving parts, each one of which must be designed, Given a fixed level of technology, such a highly capa- developed, launched, operated, and therefore paid for. ble MAV + ERV stack will necessarily be more mas- On multiple occasions--including the present--the high sive than an equivalent MAV designed to go only to perceived technical risk and cost risk has prevented a Mars orbit. Thus, everything else being equal, Earth- NASA sample return campaign from starting. We ar- Direct architectures seem to require the ability to land gue that a Mars Sample Return (MSR) architecture that larger single payloads on Mars than does the DSA. eliminates the need for MOR may reduce the cost of This, in turn requires larger individual launch vehicles returning carefully selected Mars samples by a factor to inject larger landers on trajectories toward Mars. of two or more relative to the DSA, and thus allow an With this in mind, [2], JSC studied an Earth- MSR campaign to start. Moreover, we argue that Direct MSR point-design mission utilizing a human spacecraft transportation systems currently being exploration heavy lift launcher. In that mission, a mid planned for development and funded by HEOMD may L/D entry vehicle flies a guided hypersonic entry to be utilized for implementing such an MSR architecture execute a precision landing with terminal hazard without the need for large, expensive, new spaceflight avoidance in order to place a 4.5 ton lander in proxim- hardware investments. ity to surface features determined to be of high scien- Benefits of Eliminating MOR: It is important to rec- tific interest. The lander acquires a regolith sample ognize that the reference DSA was not crafted and with a robotic arm, places it in a container on an ERV makes no claim to be, the least costly method possible located on top of a 2 stage MAV. The MAV + ERV for returning carefully selected samples from Mars. combination returns the sample cannister to Earth orbit Rather, the DSA is crafted to satisfy at least three im- where it is retrieved by the Shuttle. The MAV utilizes portant external constraints. First, all mission elements a storable bi-propellant propulsion system and the must fit within the mass and volume constraints of ERV utilizes Solar Electric Propulsion (SEP). The existing launch vehicles. Second, all mission elements ERV has a wet mass of ≈ 350 kg and the MAV + ERV sent to Mars’ surface must fit within the mass and vol- combination has a wet mass of ≈ 2300 kg. Architec- ume constraints of Viking-heritage EDL landers. tures of this type not only seek to reduce risk and cost, Third, mission costs must be able to fit within a given but also to capitalize on investments by, and achieve (relatively level) funding profile. Together, these con- objectives for, the human exploration enterprise. In this Concepts and Approaches for Mars Exploration (2012) 4356.pdf case, the architecture demonstrates use of high ballistic within the NASA SLS program and the CCDev pro- coefficient, guided hypersonic EDL and precision gram. Currently, there is no integrated program to landing with hazard avoidance—capabilities which develop technology for a high performance MAV + have frequently been identified as enabling for human ERV. exploration of Mars. The dry mass of a high performance MAV or The study concluded, however: “…that if the ERV is < 100 kg, which defines them as small space- Viking heritage heatshield and parachute continue as craft. Although it is unclear whether the expected evo- the only available Mars delivery system, a MSR mis- lutionary improvement in performance of small space- sion will always be limited to using Mars Orbit Ren- craft subsystems may be sufficient to allow an all-up dezvous due to limitations of landed mass ….” sample return in the post 2018 era based on use of Red Moving Toward All-up Launch: Currently, the ideal Dragon, a modest investment in technology develop- all-up launch strategy is is not attainable, due to the ment would assure it. Earth-Direct architectures using limited capacity of existing launchers and Mars land- chemical rockets require a relatively large ΔV (≈ 6.7 ers. However, progress in that direction is scheduled to km/s, or more), implying that the propellant mass frac- occur in the mid-term (post 2018) if either or both SLS tion will be high. Because propellant mass dominates or the SpaceX Falcon Heavy become operational. The the MAV + ERV system mass budget, improvement in SpaceX Falcon Heavy can launch approximately propulsion system performance for either the MAV or 10,000 kg on a Mars trajectory with a C3 of 10 km2/s2. ERV (or both) would have a high payoff in minimizing In a companion abstract [3], it is shown that a suitably the technical risk of committing to an Earth-Direct modified SpaceX Dragon capsule (“Red Dragon”) can architecture. Current state of the art in small bi- perform all the EDL functions necessary to land on propellant systems yields a specific impulse in the Mars with a contained payload mass of ≈ 1,000 kg. We range of ≈ 340 seconds. Calculations from as early as believe that progress in small spacecraft technology 1969 showed that diborane based storable propellants will allow the design of a combined MAV + ERV for example, could reach a theoretical specific impulse spacecraft stack more than 2x smaller than the JSC in the range of ≈ 425 seconds. As the JSC study design, and therefore be capable of fitting into a Red showed, SEP for the 350 kg ERV was the preferred Dragon capsule. By itself, this would allow the return technical approach. For a 100 kg class ERV, an SEP of a so-called “grab sample” acquired from the imme- upper stage may also be superior in mass performance. diate vicinity of the lander that bypasses MOR and However, a small ERV SEP stage would likely make returns a sample directly to Earth orbit. This case is use of a Hall-effect thruster in the 600 W category. discussed in a companion abstract [4]. For such small systems, the mass of the expellant (Xe- However, a grab sample does not satisfy the non) storage tanks becomes a disproportionately large full objectives of the DSA. But, the Falcon Heavy (or fraction of the mass budget. Thus, a focused technol- SLS) can accommodate a secondary payload of ≈ ogy program to develop small spacecraft SEP propul- 1,000 kg on the same launch, inside the interplanetary sions system components would also contribute sig- cruise stage. The secondary payload could be an addi- nificantly to risk reduction of a small, Earth-Direct tional lander (carrying, for example, a small rover and architecture. One such advanced expellant is Iodine, using a proven landing system) or a communications which has high specific performance and the advantage relay orbiter, or some combination of the two. If the of not requiring a heavy pressure vessel for storage. rover is landed days or weeks before the Red Dragon A program of focused investment in high per- arrives, the hypersonic maneuvering of the Red formance MAV propulsion (chemical and SEP) and Dragon may be used to perform a precision landing in other subsystem technology could enable an affordable the vicinity of the rover.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Reference Mission of the NASA Mars Exploration Study Team
    NASA Special Publication 6107 Human Exploration of Mars: The Reference Mission of the NASA Mars Exploration Study Team Stephen J. Hoffman, Editor David I. Kaplan, Editor Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas July 1997 NASA Special Publication 6107 Human Exploration of Mars: The Reference Mission of the NASA Mars Exploration Study Team Stephen J. Hoffman, Editor Science Applications International Corporation Houston, Texas David I. Kaplan, Editor Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas July 1997 This publication is available from the NASA Center for AeroSpace Information, 800 Elkridge Landing Road, Linthicum Heights, MD 21090-2934 (301) 621-0390. Foreword Mars has long beckoned to humankind interest in this fellow traveler of the solar from its travels high in the night sky. The system, adding impetus for exploration. ancients assumed this rust-red wanderer was Over the past several years studies the god of war and christened it with the have been conducted on various approaches name we still use today. to exploring Earth’s sister planet Mars. Much Early explorers armed with newly has been learned, and each study brings us invented telescopes discovered that this closer to realizing the goal of sending humans planet exhibited seasonal changes in color, to conduct science on the Red Planet and was subjected to dust storms that encircled explore its mysteries. The approach described the globe, and may have even had channels in this publication represents a culmination of that crisscrossed its surface. these efforts but should not be considered the final solution. It is our intent that this Recent explorers, using robotic document serve as a reference from which we surrogates to extend their reach, have can continuously compare and contrast other discovered that Mars is even more complex new innovative approaches to achieve our and fascinating—a planet peppered with long-term goal.
    [Show full text]
  • Mars Earth Return Vehicle (MERV) Propulsion Options
    Mars Earth Return Vehicle (MERV) Propulsion Options Steven R. Oleson,1 Melissa L. McGuire,2 Laura Burke,3 James Fincannon,4 Joe Warner,5 Glenn Williams,6 and Thomas Parkey7 NASA Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio 44135 Tony Colozza,8 Jim Fittje,9 Mike Martini,10 and Tom Packard11 Analex Corporation, Cleveland, Ohio 44135 Joseph Hemminger12 N&R Engineering, Cleveland, Ohio 44135 John Gyekenyesi13 ASRC Engineering, Cleveland, Ohio 44135 The COMPASS Team was tasked with the design of a Mars Sample Return Vehicle. The current Mars sample return mission is a joint National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and European Space Agency (ESA) mission, with ESA contributing the launch vehicle for the Mars Sample Return Vehicle. The COMPASS Team ran a series of design trades for this Mars sample return vehicle. Four design options were investigated: Chemical Return /solar electric propulsion (SEP) stage outbound, all-SEP, all chemical and chemical with aerobraking. The all-SEP and Chemical with aerobraking were deemed the best choices for comparison. SEP can eliminate both the Earth flyby and the aerobraking maneuver (both considered high risk by the Mars Sample Return Project) required by the chemical propulsion option but also require long low thrust spiral times. However this is offset somewhat by the chemical/aerobrake missions use of an Earth flyby and aerobraking which also take many months. Cost and risk analyses are used to further differentiate the all-SEP and Chemical/Aerobrake options. 1COMPASS Lead, DSB0, 21000 Brookpark Road, and AIAA Senior Member. 2COMPASS Integration Lead, DSB0, 21000 Brookpark Road, non-member. 3Mission Designer, DSB0, 21000 Brookpark Road, and Non-Member.
    [Show full text]
  • Mars Exploration Study Workshop II: Report of a Workshop Sponsored By
    NASA Conference Publication 3243 Mars Exploration Study Workshop II Report of a workshop sponsored by NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center and held at the Ames Research Center May 24-25, 1993 Michael B. Duke and Nancy Ann Budden Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas National Aeronautics and Space Administration Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center 1993 Preface The Mars Exploration Study Project was undertaken by the Exploration Programs Office (now the Planetary Projects Office) in response to the strategic planning initiatives of the Associate Administrator for Exploration, NASA Headquarters in the summer of 1992. The purpose of the study, as viewed by the Associate Administrator for Exploration, was to establish a vision for the human exploration of Mars which would serve as a mechanism for understanding program and technical requirements that would be placed on a precursor lunar exploration program being developed by the Office of Exploration (The First Lunar Outpost). Emphasis was placed on determining the commonality between the Mars and Moon exploration programs to help ensure that total costs for both programs would be minimized and that the lunar program would not contain dead ends which would be difficult or expensive for the Mars program to correct if both programs are carried out sequentially. The study team chose an approach that emphasized the important aspects of Mars exploration without consideration of the lunar capability. Because Mars exploration is inherently more complex than initial lunar exploration programs, it was considered important to identify the characteristics required for Mars so the evolution of a FLO-like lunar program that would optimize the programmatic interactions could be planned.
    [Show full text]
  • Mars Trajectories Integrated
    Trajectory Options for Human Mars Missions Paul D. Wooster * Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 02139 Robert D. Braun † Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, 30332 Jaemyung Ahn ‡ Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 02139 and Zachary R. Putnam § Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, 30332 This paper explores trajectory options for the human exploration of Mars, with an emphasis on conjunction-class missions. Conjunction-class missions are characterized by short in-space durations with long surface stays, as opposed to the long in-space durations and short surface stays characteristic of opposition-class missions. Earth-Mars and Mars- Earth trajectories are presented across a series of mission opportunities and transfer times in order to explore the space of possible crew and cargo transfer trajectories. In the specific instance of crew transfer from Earth to Mars, the potential for aborting the mission without capture into Mars orbit is also of interest. As such two additional classes of trajectories are considered: free-return trajectories, where the trajectory would return the crew to Earth after a fixed period of time; and propulsive-abort trajectories, where the propulsive capability of the transfer vehicle is used to modify the trajectory during a Mars swing-by. The propulsive requirements of a trajectory, due to their associated impact on spacecraft mass, are clearly of interest in assessing trajectories for human Mars missions. Beyond the propulsive requirements, trajectory selection can have a significant impact on the entry velocity and therefore the aeroassist system requirements. The paper suggests potential constraints for entry velocities at Earth and Mars. Based upon Mars entry velocity, the 2- year period free-return abort trajectory is shown to be less desirable than previously considered for many mission opportunities.
    [Show full text]
  • Human to Mars? • It’S Expensive!
    Prof. Dava Newman 16.423J/HST515J Space Biomedical Engineering and Life Support 1 Human To Mars? • It’s Expensive! • Global Cooperation • Human Spirit • Science and Engineering • $20 Billion ‘Mars Direct Mission’ - Zubrin Prof. Dava Newman 16.423J/HST515J Space Biomedical Engineering and Life Support 2 Mars Reference Mission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rof. DavaNewman 16.423J/HST515JSpaceBiomedicalEngineeringandLifeSupport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
    [Show full text]
  • Strategies for Affordable Human Moon and Mars Exploration
    Strategies for Affordable Human Moon and Mars Exploration by Paul Douglas Wooster B.Sc., Aerospace Engineering (2003) Massachusetts Institute of Technology Submitted to the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Aerospace Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology February 2007 © 2007 Massachusetts Institute of Technology All rights reserved Signature of Author………………………………………………………………………… Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics February 2, 2007 Certified by………………………………………………………………………………… Edward F. Crawley Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics and Engineering Systems Thesis Supervisor Accepted by………………………………………………………………………………... Jaime Peraire Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics Chair, Committee on Graduate Students - 1 - - 2 - Strategies for Affordable Human Moon and Mars Exploration by Paul Douglas Wooster Submitted to the Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics on February 2, 2007 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Aerospace Engineering. ABSTRACT The U.S. Vision for Space Exploration calls for NASA to undertake human exploration of the Moon and Mars. This endeavor must be performed in an affordable manner in order to be successful. This thesis outlines a series of affordability strategies that could be considered as part of the Vision for Space Exploration. Analyses of specific options for affordable human Moon and Mars missions along with integrated exploration campaigns are presented. Significant results for lunar missions include recommendations to employ extended pre-descent loiter for sortie missions to more challenging sites and the use of a single launch approach, as opposed to NASA’s current 1.5 launch baseline, for crewed lunar missions. There appears to be significant opportunity for commonality between Moon and Mars exploration systems if appropriate choices are made during system development.
    [Show full text]
  • Mission Design Overview for Mars 2003/2005 Sample Return Mission
    Mission Design Overview forMars 2003/2005 Sample Return Mission Wayne J. Lee* Louis A. DAmario Ralph B. Roncoli John C. Smith Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology 4800 Oak Grove Drive Pasadena, CA 91109 * contact author: Wayne Lee MailStop: 264-380 Phone: (818) 354-8784 Fax: (818) 393-2902 Email: [email protected] EXTENDED ABSTRACT: In May 2003, a new and exciting chapter in Mars exploration will begin with the launch of the first of three spacecraft that will collectively contribute toward the goal of delivering samples from the Red Planet to Earth. This mission is called Mars Sample Return (MSR) and will utilize both the 2003 and 2005 launch opportunities with an expected sample return in October 2008. NASA and CNES are major partners inthis mission. The baseline mission mode selectedfor MSR is Mars orbit rendezvous (MOR), analogous in concept to the lunar orbit rendezvous (LOR) mode used for Apollo in the 1960s. Specifically, MSR will employ two NASA-provided landers of nearly identical design and one CNES-provided orbiter carrying a NASA payload of rendezvous sensors, orbital capture mechanisms, and an Earth entry vehicle (EEV). The high-level concept is that the landers will launch surface samples into Mars orbit, and the orbiter will retrieve the samples in orbit and then carry them back to Earth. The first element to depart for Mars will be one of the two landers. Currently, it is proposed that an intermediate class launch vehicle, such as the Boeing Delta 3 or Lockheed Martin Atlas 3A, will launch this 1800-kg lander from Cape Canaveral during the May 2003 opportunity.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Exploration of Mars: the Reference Mission of the NASA
    NASAA Special Publication 6107 Human Exploration of Mars: The Reference Mission of the NASA Mars Exploration Study Team Stephen J. Hoffman, Editor David I. Kaplan, Editor Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas July 1997 Foreword Mars has long beckoned to humankind interest in this fellow traveler of the solar from its travels high in the night sky. The system, adding impetus for exploration. ancients assumed this rust-red wanderer was Over the past several years studies the god of war and christened it with the have been conducted on various approaches name we still use today. to exploring Earth’s sister planet Mars. Much Early explorers armed with newly has been learned, and each study brings us invented telescopes discovered that this closer to realizing the goal of sending humans planet exhibited seasonal changes in color, to conduct science on the Red Planet and was subjected to dust storms that encircled explore its mysteries. The approach described the globe, and may have even had channels in this publication represents a culmination of that crisscrossed its surface. these efforts but should not be considered the final solution. It is our intent that this Recent explorers, using robotic document serve as a reference from which we surrogates to extend their reach, have can continuously compare and contrast other discovered that Mars is even more complex new innovative approaches to achieve our and fascinating—a planet peppered with long-term goal. A key element of future craters, cut by canyons deep enough to improvements to this document will be the swallow the Earth’s Grand Canyon, and incorporation of an integrated robotic/human shouldering the largest known volcano in the exploration strategy currently under solar system.
    [Show full text]
  • Reference Mission Version 3.0 Addendum to the Human Exploration of Mars: the Reference Mission of the NASA Mars Exploration Study Team
    EX13-98-036 Reference Mission Version 3.0 Addendum to the Human Exploration of Mars: The Reference Mission of the NASA Mars Exploration Study Team Exploration Office Advanced Development Office June, 1998 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center Houston, TX 77058 EX13-98-036 EX13-98-036 Reference Mission Version 3.0 Addendum to the Human Exploration of Mars: The Reference Mission of the NASA Mars Exploration Study Team June, 1998 Edited By: ______________________________ Bret G. Drake Human Mission Study Lead, Exploration Office Approved By: ______________________________ Douglas R. Cooke Manager, Exploration Office EX13-98-036 EX13-98-036 Contents A1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 1 A2.0 Strategic Modifications ...................................................................................................................... 1 A2.1 Reference Mission 1.0 Launch Strategy ......................................................................................... 2 A2.1.1 System Repackaging................................................................................................................. 5 A2.1.2 System Mass Reductions.......................................................................................................... 6 A2.1.3 Modified Launch Strategy........................................................................................................ 7 A2.2 Elimination
    [Show full text]
  • Information Technology Assessment Study Full Report
    JPL Publication 02-03 The information in this publication is summarized in the Executive Summary, JPL Publication 02-02. Information Technology Assessment Study Full Report John Peterson, Study Leader Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California V V v _J v _v_ ----4 National Aeronautics and rt=/ Space Administration Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology V Pasadena, California March 2002 Tile research described in this publication was carded out in part at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, W California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space W Administration. W Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not constitute or imply its endorsement by the United States Government or the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology. An Executive Summary, JPL Publication-02-02, 0f this IT Assessment Study is published under separate cover. Copies are available through Jet Propulsion Laboratory Engineering Document Services, 4800 Oak Grove Drive, Mail Station 111-29, Pasadena, CA 91109, tel. 818-354-6222. IT Assessment Study ExecufiveSummary published separately as JPL Publication 02-02 ES. 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1 ES.20SS User Group Perspective. .............................................. :................................................ 4 ES.3 IT Provider Perspective
    [Show full text]
  • Certified By
    Extra-terrestrial Nuclear Power Stations: Transportation and Operation i MASSACHUSETTSIN--E- i by i OF TECHNOLOGY I Susan Christine Kane MAR 2 8 2006 B.S. Engineering Physics and Nuclear Engineering LIBRARIES Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 2004 ! ._ Submitted to the Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering ARCHIVES in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Nuclear Science and Engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology August 2005&2ef 005 ©C2005 Massachusetts Institute of Technology All rights reserved A/ Cen Signature of Author Department of Nuclear Science and'Engineering 20,2005 \\ \ \\ ANK~~\\IN~~ \\\\\' K~~ \~ \ x August Certifiedby:.. by.... -- -- -, N - - -.. 2A.5 Jeffre A.Hoffman J Professor of --the Practice-- of--- Aeronautics----- -- and Astronautics Thesis Supervisor Certified...........by: , ................-Ad.---...............', ------ Andrew C. Kadak Professor of the Practice of Nuclear Science and Engineering Thesis Reader J A -'^ Acceptedby:..............................-. -c- '1".~~ ~Jeffery A. Coderre Chairman, Department Committee on Graduate Studies (This page left intentionally blank) Extra-terrestrial Nuclear Power Stations: Transportation and Operation by Susan Christine Kane Submitted to the Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering on August 19, 2005 in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Nuclear Science and Engineering ABSTRACT Many challenges exist when considering nuclear power to provide electricity for bases on the Moon or Mars, including launch safety, landing safety, deployment, control, and protecting the astronauts from radiation. Examples from the past provide guidance in these areas but surface operations on another body have never been attempted and rarely studied. This thesis discusses the risks and design considerations for launching, transporting, landing.
    [Show full text]
  • Generalizable Skills and Knowledge for Exploration Missions
    NASA/CR-2018-220445 Generalizable Skills and Knowledge for Exploration Missions Jack Stuster, PhD, CPE Anacapa Sciences, Inc. Santa Barbara, California Jurine Adolf, PhD Vicky Byrne, MS Maya Greene, PhD KBRwyle Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas National Aeronautics and Space Administration Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas 77058 July 2019 NASA STI Program Office ... in Profile Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the • CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. advancement of aeronautics and space science. The Collected papers from scientific and NASA scientific and technical information (STI) technical conferences, symposia, seminars, program plays a key part in helping NASA or other meetings sponsored or maintain this important role. co-sponsored by NASA. The NASA STI program operates under the • SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific, auspices of the Agency Chief Information Officer. technical, or historical information from It collects, organizes, provides for archiving, and NASA programs, projects, and missions, disseminates NASA’s STI. The NASA STI often concerned with subjects having program provides access to the NTRS Registered substantial public interest. and its public interface, the NASA Technical Report Server, thus providing one of the largest • TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. collections of aeronautical and space science STI in English-language translations of foreign the world. Results are published in both non-NASA scientific and technical material pertinent to channels and by NASA in the NASA STI Report NASA’s mission. Series, which includes the following report types: Specialized services also include organizing • TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of and publishing research results, distributing completed research or a major significant specialized research announcements and feeds, phase of research that present the results of providing information desk and personal search NASA Programs and include extensive data or support, and enabling data exchange services.
    [Show full text]