DOCSLIB.ORG

SPHERES Flight Operations Testing and Execution

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SPHERES Flight Operations Testing and Execution SPHERES flight operations testing and execution The MIT Faculty has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters. Citation Mohan, Swati, Alvar Saenz-Otero, Simon Nolet, David W. Miller, and Steven Sell. “SPHERES Flight Operations Testing and Execution.” Acta Astronautica 65, no. 7–8 (October 2009): 1121–1132. As Published http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2009.03.039 Publisher Elsevier Version Author's final manuscript Citable link http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/99453 Terms of Use Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-NoDerivatives Detailed Terms http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ IAC-07-A2.6.03 SPHERES Flight Operations Testing and Execution Swati Mohan Graduate Student, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA USA [email protected] Dr. Alvar Saenz-Otero Research Associate, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA USA [email protected] Dr. Simon Nolet Post-Doctoral Associate, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA USA [email protected] Dr. David W. Miller Professor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA USA [email protected] and Steven Sell SPHERES Project Manager, Payload Systems Inc., Cambridge, MA USA [email protected] Abstract SPHERES (Synchronized Position Hold Engage Reorient Experimental Satellites) is a formation flight testing facility consisting of three satellites operating inside the International Space Station (ISS). The goal is to use the long term microgravity environment of the ISS to mature formation flight and docking algorithms. The operations processes of SPHERES have also matured over the course of the first seven test sessions. This paper describes the evolution of the SPHERES program operations processes from conception to implementation to refinement through flight experience. Modifications to the operations processes were based on experience and feedback from Marshall Space Flight Center Payload Operations Center, USAF Space Test Program office at Johnson Space Center, and the crew of Expedition 13 (first to operate SPHERES on station). Important lessons learned were on aspects such as test session frequency, determination of session success, and contingency operations. The paper describes the tests sessions; then it details the lessons learned, the change in processes, and the impact on the outcome of later test sessions. SPHERES had very successful initial test sessions which allowed for modification and tailoring of the operations processes to streamline the code delivery and to tailor responses based on flight experiences. 1. Introduction to SPHERES The SPHERES project, Synchronized Position Hold Engage Reorient Experimental Satellites project, is a formation flight testbed operating inside the International Space Station (ISS) developed by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). The objective is to provide a fault tolerant environment to perform cutting Figure 1: SPHERES satellites aboard the ISS edge research for algorithm development in fields such as estimation, docking, formation Aboard the ISS, SPHERES consists of three flight, reconfiguration, fault detection and path identical satellites, a laptop computer ground planning. station, and a radio frequency (RF) transmitter to communicate between the laptop and the satellites. The SPHERES position and attitude determination system (PADS) uses a combination of infrared (IR) flash, to 1 synchronize their clocks, and ultrasonic time-of- with the third on 14P. The SPHERES hardware flight measurements to triangulate their position was de-manifested from 13P, and then from 14P; in a pseudo-GPS system. The SPHERES the hardware was returned to MIT in November satellites operate within an approximately 2m by 2003. NASA’s objective was to maximize 2m by 2m volume [1]. science with minimum mass. The SPHERES team had multiple iterations of manifest SPHERES satellites run on CO2 propellant at 25 opportunities over the next three years in order to psi, for an effective Isp of 32 seconds. The send up partial SPHERES hardware to satellites are powered by two battery packs, accomplish some minimized science objectives. consisting of eight AA batteries each. Each However, none of these opportunities came to satellite also has an expansion port, which allows fruition. The first SPHERES satellite (Red) was for external payloads to be attached at a future launched aboard flight Progress 21P on April date [2]. 24th, 2006. Also launched was a communications transmitter, along with several The ISS configuration is replicated at the MIT batteries and tanks. By 2006, the SPHERES Space Systems Laboratory in Cambridge, MA. team had shrunk from eight to six members, with Three ground satellites are maintained for testing only four original members remaining. of algorithms prior to launch. The first test sessions occurred less than a month 2. SPHERES History after launch, on May 18th and May 20th 2006, operated by Expedition 13 astronaut Jeff SPHERES was originally developed as part of a Williams. The second satellite (Blue) launched undergraduate design class at MIT in 1999. The aboard STS-121 (ULF1.1) on July 4th, 2006. objective was to give undergraduates the The third and final satellite (Orange) launched on experience of the entire lifecycle of the December 10th, 2006 on board STS-116 (12A.1). development of an aerospace product, teaching SPHERES hardware was took four launches to the engineering process as “conceive, design, arrive on the ISS, and over three years longer implement, and operate” (CDIO). Thirteen than the originally assumed few months. undergraduate students worked to develop functional requirements beginning in February Table 1 highlights the test session dates and the 1999, with fully integrated prototype hardware astronaut operating SPHERES. Table 2 gives a ready a year later. The satellites were tested description of all astronauts trained on aboard the KC-135 Reduced Gravity Aircraft in SPHERES, when they trained, and when they the spring of 2000 in short duration microgravity operated SPHERES on the ISS, if applicable. testing. Table 2 shows the time delay between the training and operations for the crew. The design of the CDIO class was updated and the flight satellites were developed, as a joint Table 1: SPHERES Test Session Dates effort with Payload Systems Inc. Three satellites Session Date Exp Crew were scheduled to be delivered to NASA in June TS001 5/18/2006 13 J. Williams 2003, with an expected launch date of July 2003. TS002 5/20/2006 13 J. Williams After the Columbia accident in February 2003, TS003 8/12/2006 13 J. Williams the team projected a delay of a few months. TS004 8/19/2006 13 J. Williams TS005 11/11/2006 14 M. Lopez-Alegria The first SPHERES hardware, consisting of one TS006 3/17/2007 14 S. Williams / M. beacon and beacon tester, was launched on Lopez-Alegria Progress 12P. This was used in Expedition 8 by TS007 3/24/2007 14 S. Williams astronaut Michael Foale to test the ultrasound TS008 4/27/2007 14 S. Williams and infrared environment of the US lab. This activity was performed twice, once in November 2003 and again in March of 2004. Table 2: Crew Training Dates vs Flight Dates Name Expedition Trained On ISS All satellite hardware was delivered in August Mike Barrat N/A July 2002 Dry Run 2003 with the expectation of launch in Mike Foale Exp 8 Oct 2003 November on Progress 13P and January 2004 on 14P. The manifest for 13P was two satellites, 2 Mike Fincke Exp 9 Jan 2004 session. The SPHERES team did not have a Exp 13 B/U Jan 2006 formalized plan from delivery to operations, but Exp 16 B/U May 2007 instead was reactionary and flexible to what the Dan Tani Exp B/U Aug 2004 latest news was from NASA. Through the Exp 16 May 2007 preparation and execution of the first seven test Leroy Chiao Exp 10 Aug 2004 session, a formalized process was developed, Bill McArthur Exp 10 B/U Aug 2005 Exp 12 Mar 2005 executed, and refined. John Phillips Exp 11 Aug 2005 Clay Anderson Exp 11 B/U Mar 2005 3.2 Preparation for Operations Exp 15* May 2006 Preparation for the first test session began Jeff Williams Exp 13 Mar 2005 May 2006 roughly a month prior to session date. The two Suni Williams Exp 13 Mar 2005 Mar 2007 main aspects were algorithm and operations Exp 14* May 2006 preparation. Algorithm preparation consisted Leo Eyhart ESA B/U Apr 2006 of creating the SPHERES Program File (SPF). Thomas Reiter Exp 13 ESA Apr 2006 The SPF file contains the project file with the Mike Lopez- Exp 14 May 2006 Nov 2006 algorithms, html files for an overview of each Alegria test, and a text file to link the tests from the Peggy Whitson Exp 13 May 2006 graphical user interface (GUI) to a test command Gregory Exp 15 B/U Dec 2006 to the satellite. The first test session SPF Chamitoff delivery to DOD Space Test Program (STP) was Sandra Exp 17 May 2007 th Mangus on April 28 . * Indicates refresher training Operations preparation included the development 3. Test Session Description of contingency plans and processes for the SPHERES team, practice session on the ground 3.1 Original Concept of Operations with retired astronaut Jeff Hoffman, and a crew The concept of operations during SPHERES conference with astronaut Jeff Williams prior to development, up until the spring of 2006, was the first test session. fairly abstract. The team had requested to be onsite at Johnson Space Center (JSC) for the first For contingency operations, the team employed two test sessions, in order to have live coverage. two methods of preparation, a listing of possible It was assumed that live coverage would only be anomalies with corresponding visual/audio available for the first two sessions, and perhaps symptoms and a flow diagram of possible test for critically important sessions afterwards, such outcomes. The list of possible anomalies was as the first three satellite operations.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Roundup Fall 2015
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration Roundup LYNDON B. JOHNSON SPACE CENTER Fall | 2015 Global (and cosmic) expansion Expansión global (y cósmica) In this edition… Guest Column 3 ISS Science Corner 4 Veteran explorers slated for future commercial crew flights 5 All aboard the education I’M WRITING THIS COLUMN having only been on the job for about two station! weeks, so I’m still learning the duties of a deputy director. While I have 6 White House lands at the been to the ninth floor of Building 1 many times, it is interesting how I house of human spaceflight have begun to see the center differently as I take on this new role. to praise our Commitment to I was the Orion Program manager for nearly eight years. During that Action for Hispanic education time, I experienced many transitions in NASA leadership and policy. 8 ‘Leaf’ it to NASA to grow Some of these were difficult for the team to weather, but they met the lettuce on space station challenge. I believe these experiences taught me how to anticipate, adapt and lead a team through change. It is my hope that these 9 It’s complicated: New Pluto experiences will provide me the insight to help Ellen lead the center images from NASA’s New into NASA’s next chapters of human spaceflight. Horizons offer many surprises I know that the other programs and directorates at JSC are faced 10 Meet Delene Sedillo, with their own specific, dynamic environments. In the coming weeks, NASA/PHOTO Associate Director, Office of I’ll be taking some time to get an understanding of the strategies and Mark Geyer Procurement challenges involving all of the organizations here at JSC.
    [Show full text]
  • SPHERES Interact - Human-Machine Interaction Aboard the International Space Station
    SPHERES Interact - Human-Machine Interaction aboard the International Space Station Enrico Stoll Steffen Jaekel Jacob Katz Alvar Saenz-Otero Space Systems Laboratory Massachusetts Institute of Technology 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge Massachusetts, 02139-4307, USA [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Renuganth Varatharajoo Department of Aerospace Engineering University Putra Malaysia 43400 Selangor, Malaysia [email protected] Abstract The deployment of space robots for servicing and maintenance operations, which are tele- operated from ground, is a valuable addition to existing autonomous systems since it will provide flexibility and robustness in mission operations. In this connection, not only robotic manipulators are of great use but also free-flying inspector satellites supporting the oper- ations through additional feedback to the ground operator. The manual control of such an inspector satellite at a remote location is challenging since the navigation in three- dimensional space is unfamiliar and large time delays can occur in the communication chan- nel. This paper shows a series of robotic experiments, in which satellites are controlled by astronauts aboard the International Space Station (ISS). The Synchronized Position Hold Engage Reorient Experimental Satellites (SPHERES) were utilized to study several aspects of a remotely controlled inspector satellite. The focus in this case study is to investigate different approaches to human-spacecraft interaction with varying levels of autonomy under zero-gravity conditions. 1 Introduction Human-machine interaction is a wide spread research topic on Earth since there are many terrestrial applica- tions, such as industrial assembly or rescue robots. Analogously, there are a number of possible applications in space such as maintenance, inspection and assembly amongst others.
    [Show full text]
  • South Australia NEWSLETTER No41
    SLOVENIA ISSN 1448-8175 Australia Post print approved SOUTH AUSTRALIA PP 534387/00013 ISSUE No. 41 Autumn 2007 NEWSLETTER Slovenski Klub Adelaide 50 let 1957 – 2007 Slovenian Club Adelaide 50 years President’s address Sometimes it is hard to find the words to describe something but fortunately I do not have that problem. Super – excellent, that is the atmosphere and feeling in our Slovenian Club Adelaide. Our Club is very well visited by our members and more and more by non-members. With confidence then we can look to the future. I would like to thank all members who are directly contributing with hard work and dedication and those of you who come and help our Club with your presence. Kind regards to all. Tomo Leš Themajestic powerof theLIPIZZANER The Lipica stud farm was established in Slovenia in 1580. The horses take their name from the village of Lipica where they have been bred since the 16th century. Lipica, located in the southwest of Slovenia, is the oldest European stud breeding the same horse since its beginning. May 19 1580 is remembered as the day when Archduke of Aust ria Charles II bought a stud farm and a deserted mansion in Lipica and the legend of the Lipizzaner began. 1 SLOVENIA SOUTH AUSTRALIA NEWSLETTER Issue No. 41 Autumn 2007 Slovenia South Australia: Kulturni Dan Input and involvement from all South Australian Slovenians is welcomed Cultural Day and encouraged. Expressions of Slovenian Club Adelaide interest and contributions should be February 11, 2007 forwarded to the President at least one week prior to the Slovenian Club Committee’s scheduled meetings (second Sunday of every month).
    [Show full text]
  • Orbital Debris: a Chronology
    NASA/TP-1999-208856 January 1999 Orbital Debris: A Chronology David S. F. Portree Houston, Texas Joseph P. Loftus, Jr Lwldon B. Johnson Space Center Houston, Texas David S. F. Portree is a freelance writer working in Houston_ Texas Contents List of Figures ................................................................................................................ iv Preface ........................................................................................................................... v Acknowledgments ......................................................................................................... vii Acronyms and Abbreviations ........................................................................................ ix The Chronology ............................................................................................................. 1 1961 ......................................................................................................................... 4 1962 ......................................................................................................................... 5 963 ......................................................................................................................... 5 964 ......................................................................................................................... 6 965 ......................................................................................................................... 6 966 ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Human Spaceflight in Social Media: Promoting Space Exploration Through Twitter
    Human Spaceflight in Social Media: Promoting Space Exploration Through Twitter Pierre J. Bertrand,1 Savannah L. Niles,2 and Dava J. Newman1,3 turn back now would be to deny our history, our capabilities,’’ said James Michener.1 The aerospace industry has successfully 1 Man-Vehicle Laboratory, Department of Aeronautics and Astro- commercialized Earth applications for space technologies, but nautics; 2Media Lab, Department of Media Arts and Sciences; and 3 human space exploration seems to lack support from both fi- Department of Engineering Systems, Massachusetts Institute of nancial and human public interest perspectives. Space agencies Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts. no longer enjoy the political support and public enthusiasm that historically drove the human spaceflight programs. If one uses ABSTRACT constant year dollars, the $16B National Aeronautics and While space-based technologies for Earth applications are flourish- Space Administration (NASA) budget dedicated for human ing, space exploration activities suffer from a lack of public aware- spaceflight in the Apollo era has fallen to $7.9B in 2014, of ness as well as decreasing budgets. However, space exploration which 41% is dedicated to operations covering the Internati- benefits are numerous and include significant science, technological onal Space Station (ISS), the Space Launch System (SLS) and development, socioeconomic benefits, education, and leadership Orion, and commercial crew programs.2 The European Space contributions. Recent robotic exploration missions have
    [Show full text]
  • STS-117 Press Kit STS-117 Press Kit
    STS-117 Press Kit STS-117 Press Kit CONTENTS Section Page STS-117 MISSION OVERVIEW................................................................................................. 1 STS-117 TIMELINE OVERVIEW................................................................................................ 11 MISSION PRIORITIES............................................................................................................. 13 LAUNCH AND LANDING ........................................................................................................... 15 LAUNCH............................................................................................................................................... 15 ABORT-TO-ORBIT (ATO)...................................................................................................................... 15 TRANSATLANTIC ABORT LANDING (TAL)............................................................................................. 15 RETURN-TO-LAUNCH-SITE (RTLS)....................................................................................................... 15 ABORT ONCE AROUND (AOA)............................................................................................................... 15 LANDING ............................................................................................................................................. 15 MISSION PROFILE................................................................................................................... 17 STS-117
    [Show full text]
  • International Space Station Environmental Control and Life Support System Status: 2009 - 2010
    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20100021979 2019-08-30T09:51:08+00:00Z International Space Station Environmental Control and Life Support System Status: 2009 - 2010 David E. Williams' and Jason R. DakeZ NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas, 77058 and Gregory J. Gentry3 Boeing Space Exploration — International Space Station, Houston, Texas, 77058 The International Space Station (ISS) Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLS) system includes regenerative and non -regenerative technologies that provide the basic life support functions to support the crew, while maintaining a safe and habitable shirtsleeve environment. This paper provides a summary of the U.S. ECLS system activities over the past year, covering the period of time between March 2009 and February 2010. The ISS continued permanent crew operations, with the start of Phase 3 of the ISS Assembly Sequence and an increase of the ISS crew size from three to six. Work continues on the last of the Phase 3 pressurized elements. I. Introduction HE ISS is a global partnership of 15 nations representing six space age ncies, including the United States TNational Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Russian Space Agency (Roscosmos), European Space Agency (ESA), Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), Canadian Space Agency (CSA), and Italian Space Agency (ASI). The participating countries are Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Italy; Japan, the Netherlands, Norway, Russia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United States, and the United Kingdom. The ISS operates at an altitude of approximately 310 to 350 km (170 to 190 nautical miles) and an inclination of 51.6° to the equator. The International Space Station Program is divided into three phases.
    [Show full text]
  • International Space Station Basics Components of The
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration International Space Station Basics The International Space Station (ISS) is the largest orbiting can see 16 sunrises and 16 sunsets each day! During the laboratory ever built. It is an international, technological, daylight periods, temperatures reach 200 ºC, while and political achievement. The five international partners temperatures during the night periods drop to -200 ºC. include the space agencies of the United States, Canada, The view of Earth from the ISS reveals part of the planet, Russia, Europe, and Japan. not the whole planet. In fact, astronauts can see much of the North American continent when they pass over the The first parts of the ISS were sent and assembled in orbit United States. To see pictures of Earth from the ISS, visit in 1998. Since the year 2000, the ISS has had crews living http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/. continuously on board. Building the ISS is like living in a house while constructing it at the same time. Building and sustaining the ISS requires 80 launches on several kinds of rockets over a 12-year period. The assembly of the ISS Components of the ISS will continue through 2010, when the Space Shuttle is retired from service. The components of the ISS include shapes like canisters, spheres, triangles, beams, and wide, flat panels. The When fully complete, the ISS will weigh about 420,000 modules are shaped like canisters and spheres. These are kilograms (925,000 pounds). This is equivalent to more areas where the astronauts live and work. On Earth, car- than 330 automobiles.
    [Show full text]
  • SSEC SF4 Ppt.Pdf (395.7Kb)
    Design and Operation of Micro-Gravity Dynamics and Controls Laboratories Georgia Institute of Technology Space Systems Engineering Conference Atlanta, GA GT-SSEC.F.4 Alvar Saenz-Otero David W. Miller MIT Space Systems Laboratory MIT Dept. of Aeronautics and Astronautics Using ISS to develop telescope technology MIT Space Systems Laboratory 1 Motivation • A large number of upcoming programs require the development of new space technologies – Advanced structural control – High precision staged optical control – Docking and rendezvous – Formation flight – Tethered flight • How can one demonstrate the maturity of these technologies? – Is it possible to have demonstrations and validation of models prior to flight? – Where can one not only demonstrate, but also research these technologies? JPL DARPA ESA NASA SIM Orbital Express Darwin JWST Using ISS to develop telescope technology MIT Space Systems Laboratory 2 Introduction • Space technology maturation is a challenging process – Complexity, risk, and cost increase substantially as a program progresses from ground-based research and development to space-based demonstrations • NASA’s Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs) provide a guideline to determine the state of development of a technology – Nine levels of readiness are defined – But the advancement between levels is not necessarily linear nor is it necessary to go through each level Now with ISS – Many times complex/expensive levels (e.g. TRL 7) are skipped Complexity Risk TRL 1-2 Basic principles & concept Cost TRL 3-4 Proof-of-concept &
    [Show full text]
  • NASA Spinoff 2008
    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20090002466 2019-08-30T06:03:24+00:00Z National Aeronautics and Space Administration SPINOFF 50 Y EARS OF NASA-DERIVED T ECHNOLOGIES (1958-2008) 2008 Spinoff (spin´ôf´) -noun. 1. A commercialized product incorporating NASA technology or “know how” which benefits the public. Qualifying technologies include: • Products or processes designed for NASA use, to NASA specifications, and then commercialized • Components or processes involving NASA technology incorporated into a commercial product, employed in the manufacturing of a product, or used to modify the design of an existing product • Products or processes to which NASA laboratory personnel made significant contributions, including the use of NASA facilities for testing purposes • Successful entrepreneurial endeavors by ex-NASA employees whose technical expertise was developed while employed by NASA • Products or processes commercialized as the result of a NASA patent license or waiver • Commercial products or processes developed as a result of the Small Business Innovation Research or Small Business Technology Transfer programs 2. NASA’s premier annual publication, featuring successfully commercialized NASA technologies. SPINOFF 50 YEARS OF NASA-DERIVE D TECH N OLOGIES (1958-2008) Innovative Partnerships Program 2008 On the Cover: Photographs taken from the Hubble Space Telescope and the International Space Station border a collage of past, present, and future NASA missions and spinoffs: Apollo 11 yielded emergency rescue blankets; the Space Shuttle Program improved orthotic knee Developed by joints; and research for future lunar Publications and Graphics Department missions produced electron beam NASA Center for AeroSpace Information (CASI) freeform fabrication (EBF3). Table of Contents 5 Foreword 7 Introduction 8 50 Years of NASA-Derived Technologies 30 Executive Summary 42 NASA Technologies Benefiting Society Health and Medicine Robotics Offer Newfound Surgical Capabilities ..................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Zero Robotics Tournaments
    Collaborative Competition for Crowdsourcing Spaceflight Software and STEM Education using SPHERES Zero Robotics by Sreeja Nag B.S. Exploration Geophysics, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, 2009 M.S. Exploration Geophysics, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, 2009 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 2012 © 2012 Massachusetts Institute of Technology. All rights reserved Signature of Author ____________________________________________________________________ Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics and Engineering Systems Division May 11, 2012 Certified by __________________________________________________________________________ Jeffrey A. Hoffman Professor of Practice in Aeronautics and Astronautics Thesis Supervisor Certified by __________________________________________________________________________ Olivier L. de Weck Associate Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics and Engineering Systems Thesis Supervisor Accepted by __________________________________________________________________________ Eytan H. Modiano Professor of Aeronautics and Astronautics Chair, Graduate Program Committee Accepted by __________________________________________________________________________ Joel P. Clark Professor of Materials Systems and Engineering Systems Acting Director,
    [Show full text]
  • IAA Situation Report on Space Debris - 2016
    IAA Situation Report on Space Debris - 2016 Editors: Christophe Bonnal Darren S. McKnight International A cadem y of A stronautics Notice: The cosmic study or position paper that is the subject of this report was approved by the Board of Trustees of the International Academy of Astronautics (IAA). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsoring or funding organizations. For more information about the International Academy of Astronautics, visit the IAA home page at www.iaaweb.org. Copyright 2017 by the International Academy of Astronautics. All rights reserved. The International Academy of Astronautics (IAA), an independent nongovernmental organization recognized by the United Nations, was founded in 1960. The purposes of the IAA are to foster the development of astronautics for peaceful purposes, to recognize individuals who have distinguished themselves in areas related to astronautics, and to provide a program through which the membership can contribute to international endeavours and cooperation in the advancement of aerospace activities. © International Academy of Astronautics (IAA) May 2017. This publication is protected by copyright. The information it contains cannot be reproduced without written authorization. Title: IAA Situation Report on Space Debris - 2016 Editors: Christophe Bonnal, Darren S. McKnight Printing of this Study was sponsored by CNES International Academy of Astronautics 6 rue Galilée, Po Box 1268-16, 75766 Paris Cedex 16, France www.iaaweb.org ISBN/EAN IAA : 978-2-917761-56-4 Cover Illustration: NASA IAA Situation Report on Space Debris - 2016 Editors Christophe Bonnal Darren S.
    [Show full text]