DOCSLIB.ORG

Space Launch System and NASA's Path to Mars

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Space Launch System and NASA's Path to Mars National Aeronautics and Space Administration Space Launch System And NASA’s Path to Mars Todd May Program Manager Space Launch System (SLS) Program August 2014 www.nasa.gov/sls www.nasa.gov/sls Mars Is The Mission www.nasa.gov/sls SLS_OPAG.2 Mars: The Human Destination Mars Landing: Heading for the High Ground Courtesy of Dan Durda www.nasa.gov/sls SLS_OPAG.3 The Path to Mars www.nasa.www.nasa.gov/slsgov/sls 8588_Lunch_and_Learn_.4 Mars Is the World’s Mission www.nasa.gov/sls Revolutionary Evolution 5, 8.4 or 10 Meter Payload Fairings Orion Upper Stage Interim Cryogenic Propulsion Stage Core Stage Five-Segment Solid Liquid or Solid Rocket Boosters Advanced Boosters Block I Block II 70 metric tons 4 RS-25 Engines 130 metric tons www.nasa.gov/sls Benefit: High Departure Energy ' Even the Initial configuration of SLS Cargo Flyby offers orders of magnitude greater 70.00 SLS Block 1 R Orion + iCPS payload-to-destination energy SLS Block 1 R 5.0m Fairing + iCPS 60.00 compared to existing launch vehicles; SLS Block 1B R 8.4m Fairing + EUS SLS Block 2B R 8.4m Fairing + EUS + Advanced Boosters (minmax) future configurations improve C3 50.00 Exis ng Launch Vehicles (mt) Europa Class Mission performance even further. 40.00 5m x 19m 8.4m x 19m 10m x 31m Mass (300 m3) (620 m3) (1800 m3) 30.00 System ' Higher departure energy offers more 20.00 Payload launch opportunities. Net 10.00 ' Trade space exists between 0.00 departure energy and mass 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 Characteris c Energy, C3 (km2/s2) capability. 7 www.nasa.gov/sls Game-Changing Capability MISSION FAILURE 2016 MARS OBSERVER EXOMARS PHOBOS 2 1992 (PARTIAL SUCCESS) FUTURE • Returned some data. PHOBOS 1 MISSIONS • Lost contact before 2013 deploying lander. 1988 PHOBOS 2 MAVEN VIKING 1 2011 MARS 6 1975 VIKING 2 PHOBOS-GRUNT / YINGHUO-1 (PARTIAL SUCCESS) MARS SCIENCE LABORATORY (CURIOSITY) CURIOSITY (SUCCESS) • Lander produced MARS 7 data during descent, • Landed August 6, 2012 • Failed before landing. MARS 6 2007 1973 MARS 5 PHOENIX MARS LANDER DAWN MARS 4 DAWN (Mars Gravity Assist) • Arrived Vesta July 2011 • Arrive Ceres MARS 5 MARINER 9 February 2015 (PARTIAL SUCCESS) MARS 3 2005 • Returned 60 images. MARS RECONNAISSANCE ORBITER MRO MARS 2 (SUCCESS) • Failed after nine days. 1971 KOSMOS 419 • Science operations - MARINER 8 Nov. 2006 – Nov. 2008 2004 • High Resolution Imaging ROSETTA (Low Altitude Pass) Science Experiment MARS 1969B • Communication Relay MARS 3 MARS 1969A Spirit/ (PARTIAL SUCCESS) 1969 MARINER 7 MARS EXPLORATION ROVER: OPPORTUNITY • Orbiter obtained eight MARINER 6 2003 Opportunity months of data. MARS EXPLORATION ROVER: SPIRIT (SUCCESS) • Lander landed but MARS EXPRESS / BEAGLE 2 • Opportunity – Nine gathered only ROVER years and counting, 20 seconds of data. ZOND 3 (Lunar Flyby) 1965 near Endeavor crater. • First successful LANDER 2001 • Spirit – remains silent landing on Mars. MARS ODYSSEY at its home base, Troy. ZOND 2 MARINER 3 ORBITER MARINER 4 1964 MARINER 4 1999 (SUCCESS) MARS POLAR LANDER/ • Returned 21 images. FLYBY DEEP SPACE 2 PROBES • First successful flyby. KOSMOS 21 1963 MARS CLIMATE ORBITER 1998 SPUTNIK 24 NOZOMI MARS 1 1962 SPUTNIK 22 MARS PATHFINDER 1996 MARSNIK 2 MARS 96 1960 MARSNIK 1 MARS GLOBAL SURVEYOR European United Soviet Union/ Russia/ Japan Space States Russia China Agency Mission Flyby Lander Orbiter Rover Failure www.nasa.gov/sls 8302 Science in Society.8 Case Study: Mars Fly-By [ 500-600-day free-return fly-by ' Even the Initial configuration of SLS offersof Mars;orders of 2021 magnitude window greater would payload-to-destinationinclude fly-by ofenergy Venus. compared to existing launch vehicles; future configurations improve C3 [performanceSLS is uniquelyeven further. capable of providing the required mass-to- ' Higherdeparture-energy departure energy offers needed more for launch opportunities. the mission. ' Trade space exists between departure energy and mass capability. 9 www.nasa.gov/sls Benefit: SLS Mass Lift Capability Medium/Intermediate Heavy Super Heavy Retired 300’ ' SLS initial configuration offers 200’ 70 t to LEO. Retired ' Future configurations 100’ offer 105 and 130 t to LEO. ULA SpaceX ULA NASA NASA NASA NASA ' Mass capability Atlas V 551 Falcon 9 Delta IV H Space Shuttle Saturn V 70 t 130 t benefits mean larger 160 1800 140 1600 payloads to any (m Volume Payload 120 1400 destination. 1200 100 1000 80 800 60 600 40 3 Payload Mass (mT) Mass Payload 400 ) 20 200 0 0 Mass (mT) Volume (m3) www.nasa.gov/sls Benefit: Unrivaled Payload Volume ' SLS is investigating utilizing existing fairings for early cargo flights, offering payload envelope compatibility with design for current EELVs ' Phase A studies in work for 8.4m and 10 m fairing options 4m x 12m 5m x 14m 5m x 19m 8.4m x 31m 10m x 31m (100 m3) (200 m3) (300 m3) (1200 m3) (1800 m3) 11 www.nasa.gov/sls Case Study: Mars Sample Return [ Robotic precursor mission to return material samples from Mars [ 70-t SLS could support one- launch Mars Sample return mission with sampling rover carrying ascent vehicle and in- space return vehicle [ SLS could support two-flight sample return in conjunction with 2020 Mars science rover mission, launching ascent vehicle and in- space return vehicle Source: Mars Program Planning Group, September 2012 www.nasa.gov/sls 8355_TEDx_.12 Case Study: Martian Moons [ Provides stepping-stone opportunity toward human landing on Mars [ Allows for real-time human- robotic telepresence exploration of Martian surface [ Provides ambitious Mars-vicinity target while developing Martian EDL capability [ SLS offers mass and volume capability for needed habitation and propulsion systems 8302 Science in Society.13 wwwwww.nasa.g nasaov/sls gov/sls Case Study: NASA DRA5 [ NASA’s 2009 Design Reference Architecture 5 outlines plan for 900-day human mission to Mars [ DRA5 requires 825 metric tons initial mass to low Earth orbit (almost double ISS launch mass). [ SLS exceeds DRA5 minimum 125+ t to LEO mass launch requirement [ SLS meets DRA5 minimum 10-m- diameter fairing requirement [ SLS enables crewed mission to Mars as outlined by DRA5 Source: “Human Exploration of Mars Design Reference Architecture 5.0,” NASA Mars www.nasa.gov/sls Architecture Steering Group, July 2009 8355_TEDx_.14 Recent Progress Launch Vehicle Stage Adapter: Contract MPCV-to-Stage Adapter: awarded in February 2014. First flight hardware currently in Florida for Exploration Flight Test-1 in Fall 2014. Avionics: Avionics “first light” marked in January 2014; currently testing most powerful flight system computer processor ever. Core Stage: Initial confidence barrels and domes completed; Vertical Assembly Center installation to be completed in July 2014. Boosters: Forward Skirt test completed May 2014; preparations underway for QM-1. Engines: First RS-25 engine fitted to A-1 stand at Stennis Space Center; testing begins October 2014. www.nasa.gov/sls Building to Exploration Mission-1 (EM-1) 09/2011 TestedBoosterDevelopmentMotor 07/2012 DeliveredRS25EnginestoInventory 07/2013 CompetedPreliminaryDesignReview 10/2011R 12/2013TestedSLSWindTunnelModels 07/2013 CompletedFirstConfidenceBarrelSectionWelding 10/2013CompletedThrustVectorControlTest 11/2013ConductedAdaptiveAugmentingControlFlightTest ACCOMPLISHMENTS 12/2013CompletedLOXForwardDomeManufacturingDemo 1/2014ConductedAvionics“FirstLight”inIntegrationFacility 02/2014 ShippedMultiPurposeCrewVehicleStageAdapterforEFT1 07/2014 CompleteManufacturingToolingInstallation 07/201415 TestMainEngines,Boosters,&CoreStageStructure 07/2015CompletetheSLSCriticalDesignReview 06/2016AssembletheCoreStageAssemblyandTestFire WHAT’SNEXT 07/2017StacktheSLSVehicle 12/2017TransportSLSfromtheVABtotheLaunchPad 16 www.nasa.gov/sls Man cannot discover new oceans unless he has the courage to lose sight of the shore. For More Information www.nasa.gov/sls www.twitter.com/nasa_sls www.facebook.com/nasasls www.nasa.gov/sls 8442_IAC.17.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Phobos, Deimos: Formation and Evolution Alex Soumbatov-Gur
    Phobos, Deimos: Formation and Evolution Alex Soumbatov-Gur To cite this version: Alex Soumbatov-Gur. Phobos, Deimos: Formation and Evolution. [Research Report] Karpov institute of physical chemistry. 2019. hal-02147461 HAL Id: hal-02147461 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02147461 Submitted on 4 Jun 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Phobos, Deimos: Formation and Evolution Alex Soumbatov-Gur The moons are confirmed to be ejected parts of Mars’ crust. After explosive throwing out as cone-like rocks they plastically evolved with density decays and materials transformations. Their expansion evolutions were accompanied by global ruptures and small scale rock ejections with concurrent crater formations. The scenario reconciles orbital and physical parameters of the moons. It coherently explains dozens of their properties including spectra, appearances, size differences, crater locations, fracture symmetries, orbits, evolution trends, geologic activity, Phobos’ grooves, mechanism of their origin, etc. The ejective approach is also discussed in the context of observational data on near-Earth asteroids, main belt asteroids Steins, Vesta, and Mars. The approach incorporates known fission mechanism of formation of miniature asteroids, logically accounts for its outliers, and naturally explains formations of small celestial bodies of various sizes.
    [Show full text]
  • Oxygen Exosphere of Mars: Evidence from Pickup Ions Measured By
    Oxygen Exosphere of Mars: Evidence from Pickup Ions Measured by MAVEN By Ali Rahmati Submitted to the graduate degree program in the Department of Physics and Astronomy, and the Graduate Faculty of the University of Kansas in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. ________________________________ Professor Thomas E. Cravens, Chair ________________________________ Professor Philip S. Baringer ________________________________ Professor David Braaten ________________________________ Professor Mikhail V. Medvedev ________________________________ Professor Stephen J. Sanders Date Defended: 22 January 2016 The Dissertation Committee for Ali Rahmati certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Oxygen Exosphere of Mars: Evidence from Pickup Ions Measured by MAVEN ________________________________ Professor Thomas E. Cravens, Chair Date approved: 22 January 2016 ii Abstract Mars possesses a hot oxygen exosphere that extends out to several Martian radii. The main source for populating this extended exosphere is the dissociative recombination of molecular oxygen ions with electrons in the Mars ionosphere. The dissociative recombination reaction creates two hot oxygen atoms that can gain energies above the escape energy at Mars and escape from the planet. Oxygen loss through this photochemical reaction is thought to be one of the main mechanisms of atmosphere escape at Mars, leading to the disappearance of water on the surface. In this work the hot oxygen exosphere of Mars is modeled using a two-stream/Liouville approach as well as a Monte-Carlo simulation. The modeled exosphere is used in a pickup ion simulation to predict the flux of energetic oxygen pickup ions at Mars. The pickup ions are created via ionization of neutral exospheric oxygen atoms through photo-ionization, charge exchange with solar wind protons, and electron impact ionization.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Do We Explore?
    Why Do We Explore? Lesson Six Why Do We Explore? About This Lesson Students will work in small teams, each of which will be given a different reason why humans explore. Each team will become the expert on their one reason and will add a letter and summary sentence to an EXPLORE poster using their reason for exploration. With all the reasons on the poster, the word EXPLORE will be complete. Students will be using the skills of working in cooperative learning teams, reading, summarizing, paraphrasing, and creating a sentence that will best represent their reason for exploration. Students will also be illustrating and copying other teams sentences so that each student will have a small copy of the large class- room poster for reference or extension purposes. The teacher will lead a discussion that relates the reasons humans explore to the planned and possible future missions to Mars. Objectives Students will: v review the seven traditional reasons why people explore v write a summary of their reason why humans explore v illustrate their exploration summaries v relate the reasons for exploration to the missions to Mars Background Students do not always realize that the steps in future exploration are built on a tradition of Why Do We Explore? exploration that is as old as humans. This lesson is intended to introduce the concept of exploration through the seven traditional reasons that express why humans have always been explorers. Social scientists know that everyone, no matter how young or old, is constantly exploring the world and how it works. Space exploration, including the possible missions to Mars, has opened up a whole new world for us to explore.
    [Show full text]
  • Mars Exploration: an Overview of Indian and International Mars Missions Nayamavalsa Scariah1, Dr
    Taurian Innovative Journal/Volume 1/ Issue 1 Mars exploration: An overview of Indian and International Mars Missions NayamaValsa Scariah1, Dr. Mili Ghosh2, Dr.A.P.Krishna3 Birla Institute of Technology, Mesra, Ranchi Abstract- Mars is the fourth planet from the sun. It is 1. Introduction also known as red planet because of its iron oxide content. There are lots of missions have been launched to Mars is also known as red planet, because of the mars for better understanding of our neighboring planet. reddish iron oxide prevalent on its surface gives it a There are lots of unmanned spacecraft including reddish appearance. It is the fourth planet from sun. orbiters, landers and rovers have been launched into mars since early 1960. Sputnik was the first satellite The term sol is used to define duration of solar day on launched in 1957 by Soviet Union. After seven failure Mars. A mean Martian solar day or sol is 24 hours 39 missions to Mars, Mariner 4 was the first satellite which minutes and 34.244 seconds. Many space missions to reached the Martian orbiter successfully. The Viking 1 Mars have been planned and launched for Mars was the first lander reached on Mars on 1975. India exploration (Table:1) but most of them failed without successfully launched a spacecraft, Mangalyan (Mars completing the task specially in early attempts th Orbiter Mission) on 5 November, 2013, with five whereas some NASA missions were very payloads to Mars. India was the first nation to successful(such as the twin Mars Exploration Rovers, successfully reach Mars on its first attempt.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 1: Venus Missions
    Appendix 1: Venus Missions Sputnik 7 (USSR) Launch 02/04/1961 First attempted Venus atmosphere craft; upper stage failed to leave Earth orbit Venera 1 (USSR) Launch 02/12/1961 First attempted flyby; contact lost en route Mariner 1 (US) Launch 07/22/1961 Attempted flyby; launch failure Sputnik 19 (USSR) Launch 08/25/1962 Attempted flyby, stranded in Earth orbit Mariner 2 (US) Launch 08/27/1962 First successful Venus flyby Sputnik 20 (USSR) Launch 09/01/1962 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Sputnik 21 (USSR) Launch 09/12/1962 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Cosmos 21 (USSR) Launch 11/11/1963 Possible Venera engineering test flight or attempted flyby Venera 1964A (USSR) Launch 02/19/1964 Attempted flyby, launch failure Venera 1964B (USSR) Launch 03/01/1964 Attempted flyby, launch failure Cosmos 27 (USSR) Launch 03/27/1964 Attempted flyby, upper stage failure Zond 1 (USSR) Launch 04/02/1964 Venus flyby, contact lost May 14; flyby July 14 Venera 2 (USSR) Launch 11/12/1965 Venus flyby, contact lost en route Venera 3 (USSR) Launch 11/16/1965 Venus lander, contact lost en route, first Venus impact March 1, 1966 Cosmos 96 (USSR) Launch 11/23/1965 Possible attempted landing, craft fragmented in Earth orbit Venera 1965A (USSR) Launch 11/23/1965 Flyby attempt (launch failure) Venera 4 (USSR) Launch 06/12/1967 Successful atmospheric probe, arrived at Venus 10/18/1967 Mariner 5 (US) Launch 06/14/1967 Successful flyby 10/19/1967 Cosmos 167 (USSR) Launch 06/17/1967 Attempted atmospheric probe, stranded in Earth orbit Venera 5 (USSR) Launch 01/05/1969 Returned atmospheric data for 53 min on 05/16/1969 M.
    [Show full text]
  • Mariner to Mercury, Venus and Mars
    NASA Facts National Aeronautics and Space Administration Jet Propulsion Laboratory California Institute of Technology Pasadena, CA 91109 Mariner to Mercury, Venus and Mars Between 1962 and late 1973, NASA’s Jet carry a host of scientific instruments. Some of the Propulsion Laboratory designed and built 10 space- instruments, such as cameras, would need to be point- craft named Mariner to explore the inner solar system ed at the target body it was studying. Other instru- -- visiting the planets Venus, Mars and Mercury for ments were non-directional and studied phenomena the first time, and returning to Venus and Mars for such as magnetic fields and charged particles. JPL additional close observations. The final mission in the engineers proposed to make the Mariners “three-axis- series, Mariner 10, flew past Venus before going on to stabilized,” meaning that unlike other space probes encounter Mercury, after which it returned to Mercury they would not spin. for a total of three flybys. The next-to-last, Mariner Each of the Mariner projects was designed to have 9, became the first ever to orbit another planet when two spacecraft launched on separate rockets, in case it rached Mars for about a year of mapping and mea- of difficulties with the nearly untried launch vehicles. surement. Mariner 1, Mariner 3, and Mariner 8 were in fact lost The Mariners were all relatively small robotic during launch, but their backups were successful. No explorers, each launched on an Atlas rocket with Mariners were lost in later flight to their destination either an Agena or Centaur upper-stage booster, and planets or before completing their scientific missions.
    [Show full text]
  • 2012.07.1.4X12239 Page 1 of 16 GLEX
    GLEX-2012.07.1.4x12239 Mars—On the Path or In the Way? Brent Sherwood Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, USA, [email protected] Explore Mars may not be the highest and best use of government-funded human space flight. However, Explore Mars is pervasively accepted as the ultimate goal for human space flight. This meme has become refractory within the human space flight community despite dramatic contextual changes since Apollo: human space flight is no longer central to commonly-held national priorities, NASA’s fraction of the federal budget has diminished 8 fold, over 60 enabling technology challenges have been identified, and the stunning achievements of robotic Mars exploration have accelerated. The Explore Mars vision has not kept pace with these changes. An unprecedented budgetary commitment would have to be sustained for an unprecedented number of decades to achieve the Explore Mars goal. Further, the goal’s justification as uniquely able to definitively determine Mars habitability is brittle, and not driving current planning in any case; yet NASA owns the choice of this goal and has authority to change it. Three alternative goals for government investment in human space flight meet NASA’s own expressed rationale at least as well as Explore Mars, some with far greater capacity to regain the cultural centrality of human space flight and to grow by attracting private capital. At a minimum the human space flight advocacy community should address the pragmatics of choosing such a vulnerable goal. I. INTRODUCTION1 Mars by explorers using ever-better robots, who are Explore Mars is a refractory meme, but is it a vision or a now directly investigating the planet’s habitability.
    [Show full text]
  • Combinatorics in Space
    Combinatorics in Space The Mariner 9 Telemetry System Mariner 9 Mission Launched: May 30, 1971 Arrived: Nov. 14, 1971 Turned Off: Oct. 27, 1972 Mission Objectives: (Mariner 8): Map 70% of Martian surface. (Mariner 9): Study temporal changes in Martian atmosphere and surface features. Live TV A black and white TV camera was used to broadcast “live” pictures of the Martian surface. Each photo-receptor in the camera measures the brightness of a section of the Martian surface about 4-5 km square, and outputs a grayness value in the range 0-63. This value is represented as a binary 6-tuple. The TV image is thus digitalized by the photo-receptor bank and is output as a stream of thousands of binary 6-tuples. Coding Needed Without coding and a failure probability p = 0.05, 26% of the image would be in error ... unacceptably poor quality for the nature of the mission. Any coding will increase the length of the transmitted message. Due to power constraints on board the probe and equipment constraints at the receiving stations on Earth, the coded message could not be much more than 5 times as long as the data. Thus, a 6-tuple of data could be coded as a codeword of about 30 bits in length. Other concerns A second concern involves the coding procedure. Storage of data requires shielding of the storage media – this is dead weight aboard the probe and economics require that there be little dead weight. Coding should therefore be done “on the fly”, without permanent memory requirements.
    [Show full text]
  • Mars Exploration - a Story Fifty Years Long Giuseppe Pezzella and Antonio Viviani
    Chapter Introductory Chapter: Mars Exploration - A Story Fifty Years Long Giuseppe Pezzella and Antonio Viviani 1. Introduction Mars has been a goal of exploration programs of the most important space agencies all over the world for decades. It is, in fact, the most investigated celestial body of the Solar System. Mars robotic exploration began in the 1960s of the twentieth century by means of several space probes sent by the United States (US) and the Soviet Union (USSR). In the recent past, also European, Japanese, and Indian spacecrafts reached Mars; while other countries, such as China and the United Arab Emirates, aim to send spacecraft toward the red planet in the next future. 1.1 Exploration aims The high number of mission explorations to Mars clearly points out the impor- tance of Mars within the Solar System. Thus, the question is: “Why this great interest in Mars exploration?” The interest in Mars is due to several practical, scientific, and strategic reasons. In the practical sense, Mars is the most accessible planet in the Solar System [1]. It is the second closest planet to Earth, besides Venus, averaging about 360 million kilometers apart between the furthest and closest points in its orbit. Earth and Mars feature great similarities. For instance, both planets rotate on an axis with quite the same rotation velocity and tilt angle. The length of a day on Earth is 24 h, while slightly longer on Mars at 24 h and 37 min. The tilt of Earth axis is 23.5 deg, and Mars tilts slightly more at 25.2 deg [2].
    [Show full text]
  • Determination of Optimal Earth-Mars Trajectories to Target the Moons Of
    The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School Department of Aerospace Engineering DETERMINATION OF OPTIMAL EARTH-MARS TRAJECTORIES TO TARGET THE MOONS OF MARS A Thesis in Aerospace Engineering by Davide Conte 2014 Davide Conte Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science May 2014 ii The thesis of Davide Conte was reviewed and approved* by the following: David B. Spencer Professor of Aerospace Engineering Thesis Advisor Robert G. Melton Professor of Aerospace Engineering Director of Undergraduate Studies George A. Lesieutre Professor of Aerospace Engineering Head of the Department of Aerospace Engineering *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School iii ABSTRACT The focus of this thesis is to analyze interplanetary transfer maneuvers from Earth to Mars in order to target the Martian moons, Phobos and Deimos. Such analysis is done by solving Lambert’s Problem and investigating the necessary targeting upon Mars arrival. Additionally, the orbital parameters of the arrival trajectory as well as the relative required ΔVs and times of flights were determined in order to define the optimal departure and arrival windows for a given range of date. The first step in solving Lambert’s Problem consists in finding the positions and velocities of the departure (Earth) and arrival (Mars) planets for a given range of dates. Then, by solving Lambert’s problem for various combinations of departure and arrival dates, porkchop plots can be created and examined. Some of the key parameters that are plotted on porkchop plots and used to investigate possible transfer orbits are the departure characteristic energy, C3, and the arrival v∞.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Spaceflight Plans of Russia, China and India
    Presentation to the ASEB Committee on NASA Technology Roadmaps Panel on Human Health and Surface Exploration June 1, 2011 by Marcia S. Smith Space and Technology Policy Group, LLC Russia Extensive experience in human spaceflight First animal in space (1957), first man in space (1961), first woman in space (1963), first spacewalk (1965), first space station (1971) Seven successful space stations (Salyut 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and Mir) before partnering in International Space Station (ISS) No people beyond low Earth orbit (LEO), however For earth orbit, continues to rely on Soyuz, first launched in 1967, but upgraded many times and is key to ISS operations Designed space shuttle, Buran, but launched only once in automated mode (no crew) in 1988 06-01-2011 2 Russia (2) Existing reliable launch vehicles Proton is largest: 21 tons to LEO; 5.5 tons to geostationary transfer orbit (GTO) Attempts to build Saturn V-equivalent in 1960s and 1970s failed (N1 failed four times in four attempts 1969-1972) Energiya booster in 1980s only flew twice (1987 with Polyus and 1988 with Buran). Abandoned for financial reasons. Was 100 tons to LEO; 18-20 tons to GTO; 32 tons to lunar trajectory. RD-170 engines for Energiya’s strap-ons live on today in other forms for Zenit, Atlas V, and Angara (under development) 06-01-2011 3 Russia (3) Robotic planetary space exploration mixed Excellent success at – Moon (Luna and Lunokhod series, plus Zond circumlunar flights) Venus (Venera series) Halley’s Comet (Vega 1 and 2—also Venus) Jinxed at Mars More than a dozen failures in 1960s - 1970s Partial success with Phobos 2 in 1988 (Phobos 1 failed) Mars 96 failed to leave Earth orbit Phobos-Grunt scheduled for later this year; designed as sample return from Phobos (includes Chinese orbiter) 06-01-2011 4 Russia (4) Grand statements over decades about sending people to the Moon and Mars, but never enough money to proceed.
    [Show full text]
  • Alluvial Fans As Potential Sites for Preservation of Biosignatures on Mars
    Alluvial Fans as Potential Sites for Preservation of Biosignatures on Mars Phylindia Gant August 15, 2016 Candidate, Masters of Environmental Science Committee Chair: Dr. Deborah Lawrence Committee Member: Dr. Manuel Lerdau, Dr. Michael Pace 2 I. Introduction Understanding the origin of life Life on Earth began 3.5 million years ago as the temperatures in the atmosphere were cool enough for molten rocks to solidify (Mojzsis et al 1996). Water was then able to condense and fall to the Earth’s surface from the water vapor that collected in the atmosphere from volcanoes. Additionally, atmospheric gases from the volcanoes supplied Earth with carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, and oxygen. Even though the oxygen was not free oxygen, it was possible for life to begin from the primordial ooze. The environment was ripe for life to begin, but how would it begin? This question has intrigued humanity since the dawn of civilization. Why search for life on Mars There are several different scientific ways to answer the question of how life began. Some scientists believe that life started out here on Earth, evolving from a single celled organism called Archaea. Archaea are a likely choice because they presently live in harsh environments similar to the early Earth environment such as hot springs, deep sea vents, and saline water (Wachtershauser 2006). Another possibility for the beginning of evolution is that life traveled to Earth on a meteorite from Mars (Whitted 1997). Even though Mars is anaerobic, carbonate-poor and sulfur rich, it was warm and wet when Earth first had organisms evolving (Lui et al.
    [Show full text]