DOCSLIB.ORG

From LEO, to the Moon and Then Mars

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
From LEO, to the Moon and Then Mars 62nd International Astronautical Congress, Capetown, SA. Copyright ©2011 by the International Astronautical Federation. All rights reserved. SYMPOSIUM ON HUMAN SPACE ENDEAVOURS IAC-11.B3.1.8 THE GLOBAL EXPLORATION ROADMAP Bernhard Hufenbach ESA ESTEC, Noordwijk, Netherlands, [email protected] Kathleen C. Laurini NASA, Headquarters, Washington, DC, USA, [email protected] Jean-Claude Piedboeuf Canadian Space Agency (CSA), Longueuil, QC, Canada, [email protected] Britta Schade Deutsches Zentrum fur Luft- und Raumfahrt e.V. (DLR), Bonn, Germany, [email protected] Kohtaro Matsumoto JAXA JSPEC, Sagimihara, Japan, [email protected] Francois Spiero CNES Headquarters, Paris, France, [email protected] Andrea Lorenzoni Italian Space Agency, ASI, Rome, Italy, [email protected] The International Space Exploration Coordination Group (ISECG) was established in response to “The Global Exploration Strategy: The Framework for Coordination” developed by fourteen space agencies1 and released in May 2007. This GES Framework Document recognizes that preparing for human space exploration is a stepwise process, starting with basic knowledge and culminating in a sustained human presence in space. Robotic exploration is considered an important component of expanding human presence in space in order to increase the knowledge of future destinations, take steps to reduce risks to human explorers, and ensure the human missions can deliver maximum scientific discoveries. Sharing this common understanding of space exploration, ISECG participating agencies have started concrete discussions on the purpose and goals of exploring different destinations. They have defined associated mission scenarios outlining the overall exploration sequence. Agencies have recognized that (a) different destinations and related mission scenarios require different challenges to be mastered and risks to be addressed and (b) opportunities exist to exploit synergetic capabilities linked to different destinations. Senior agency managers representing agencies contributing to ISECG have agreed in June 2010 to start the development of the Global Exploration Roadmap (GER), recognizing that such a roadmap will be evolving and responding to new programmatic priorities, scientific discoveries and technological breakthroughs. The Global Exploration Roadmap is intended to serve as a tool or international reference framework for Facilitating the convergence of international human space exploration mission plans, programmes and policies and thereby enhancing opportunities for collaboration and coordination; Maximizing the benefits resulting from each planned mission, considering also opportunities it enables for the development of partnerships and follow-on mission scenarios; 1 In alphabetical order: ASI (Italy), BNSC – now UKSA (United Kingdom), CNES (France), CNSA (China), CSA (Canada), CSIRO (Australia), DLR (Germany), ESA (European Space Agency), ISRO (India), JAXA (Japan), KARI (Republic of Korea), NASA (United States of America), NSAU (Ukraine), Roscosmos (Russia). “Space Agencies” refers to government organizations responsible for space activities. IAC-11-B3.1.8 Page 1 of 10 62nd International Astronautical Congress, Capetown, SA. Copyright ©2011 by the International Astronautical Federation. All rights reserved. Encouraging timely and coordinated investments in the development of enabling technologies and their demonstration, with special emphasis on a near-term commitment to fully use the International Space Station (ISS) for preparing future human exploration missions. Through the development of the GER, ISECG participating agencies demonstrate their interest in a globally coordinated space exploration effort along the principles of the vision described in the Global Exploration Strategy (GES) and for the benefit of the global society. For more information on the ISECG please consult the ISECG website at www.globalspaceexploration.org or contact the ISECG Secretariat at: [email protected]. I. INTRODUCTION The development of the 1st version of the GER focused initially on developing the adequate In June 2010, ISECG participating agencies started framework. The framework includes three key the development of the Global Exploration Roadmap elements: (GER) and released its first version in September 2011. As resource availability becomes critical at ● Common Goals: Many ISECG participating global level and interest in cooperation increases, agencies have devoted significant effort in agencies will benefit from the work in developing the the last years to defining their goals and GER by informing near-term investment decisions, objectives for exploration, often engaging identifying partnerships and renewing the spirit of their stakeholder communities in this exploration. process. An initial assessment of individual agency goals and objectives was conducted The GER serves as a common planning tool for during the development of the GES. This participating agencies driven by the shared interest to was followed by a dialog on lunar enhance coordination and cooperation for exploration. exploration goals and objectives during Consistent with existing policies and plans of development of the ISECG Reference participating agencies, the GER introduces a long- Architecture for Human Lunar Exploration range strategy for future human exploration mission (see Reference 1). Building on this body of scenarios. This common strategy leads to a work, the commonality assessment of sustainable human exploration of Mars. It begins exploration goals and objectives has been with full use of the International Space Station to extended to all exploration destinations prepare for exploration. The ISS is not only an leading to development of eigth high-level excellent in-space platform for demonstrating common goals and associated objectives. technologies and capabilities and performing research, but it is the current focus of the human spaceflight ● The Long-range Strategy: The development program for most nations. With this comes the of the long-range strategy has been informed opportunity to use the ISS to prepare for the next by detailed work done by ISECG steps. participating agencies. This common long- range strategy reflects ISECG participating The GER will be regularly updated to reflect the agency’s policies, as far as existing, and evolving status of agency’s policies and plans and builds on ISECG participating agency’s outcome of additional assessments. The publication preparatory activities and plans. As said of the first version reflects work in progress and the previously, it reflects a common desire to decision to share this work early has been driven by fully utilize the ISS and progressively the interest to engage the broader stakeholder develop and demonstrate the capabilities community in the discussion. It is noted that the necessary for humans to sustainably explore process put in place for developing and maintaining the surface of Mars. The strategy is the GER may contribute to aligning exploration elaborated through mission scenarios driven policies of participating agencies which is an by the common goals. To further guide the essential condition for succeeding in the development of mission scenarios, high- implementation of sustainable space exploration. level strategic principles have been developed. These principles reflect strategic considerations of ISECG participating IAC-11-B3.1.8 Page 2 of 10 62nd International Astronautical Congress, Capetown, SA. Copyright ©2011 by the International Astronautical Federation. All rights reserved. agencies which have been informed by ● Search for Life: Determine if life is or was individual agencies studies, lessons learned present outside of Earth and focus on from the ISS programme (see Reference 2) understanding the systems that support or and previous work on the ISECG Reference supported it. Architecture for Human Lunar Exploration. ● Extend Human Presence: Extend human ● Near-term areas for Coordination and presence beyond low-Earth orbit with a Cooperation: Preparatory activities currently focus on continually increasing the number implemented by participating agencies have of individuals that can be supported at these been grouped into five areas: destinations, the duration of time that individuals can remain at these destinations, o Robotic precursor missions; and the level of self-sufficiency. o Development of enabling technologies; ● Develop Exploration Technologies and o Use of ISS for preparation of exploration missions beyond low Capabilities: Develop the knowledge, Earth orbit; capabilities, and infrastructure required to live and work at destinations beyond low- o Development of new systems and infrastructure; Earth orbit through development and testing of reliable and maintainable technologies, o Analogue activities. systems and operations in an off-Earth The activities performed in each of these environment. areas are designed to prepare for human missions in the future. It is recognised that ● Perform Science to Support Human the existence of a common long-range Exploration: Reduce the risks and increase strategy can facilitate coordination of these the productivity of future missions in our preparatory activities and processes have solar system by characterizing and been put in place to enable this to happen. mitigating the effect of the space At the same time, early sharing of environment on human health. information on these activities areas will help to establish cooperative
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bolden Testimony
    HOLD FOR RELEASE UNTIL PRESENTED BY WITNESS November 17, 2011 Statement of The Honorable Charles F. Bolden, Jr. Administrator National Aeronautics and Space Administration before the Subcommittee on Science and Space Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation U. S. Senate Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the outlook for NASA’s human space flight program. This has been a remarkable year, as we have completed assembling and outfitting of the U.S. On-orbit Segment (USOS) of the International Space Station (ISS), allowing us to focus on full utilization of the Station’s research capabilities; taken key steps in moving forward into the future of exploration beyond Low-Earth Orbit (LEO); celebrated the 50 th anniversary of human spaceflight; and witnessed the successful conclusion of the historic Space Shuttle Program. We are also pleased with the progress our industry partners have made in developing an American capability to transport cargo and eventually astronauts to the ISS, and end the outsourcing of this work to foreign governments. More importantly, this will add a critical level of redundancy for transporting cargo and crew to the ISS. A robust transportation architecture is important to ensuring full utilization of this amazing research facility. Enabling commercial crew and cargo transportation systems in LEO allows NASA to focus on developing its own systems for sending astronauts on missions of exploration beyond LEO. This split between commercial and Government systems allows for a cost effective approach to promote a broad base for human exploration by the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Space Colonies & Lunar Bases
    Space Colonies & Why Build Colonies? Lunar Bases ! It isn’t so expensive – US military is many 100’s of billions $ a year ! Fewer casualties than war – 17 astronauts in 45 years of space Karen J. Meech, flight were lost Astronomer ! Humans have an “expansionist” spirit – Much more real estate! ! Valuable resources could be brought to Earth. Institute for Astronomy ! Enough solar energy to rid the world of oil dependency could be brought to Earth for less than the cost of the Iraq war ! Profitable: e.g. 1 Metallic NEO $20 trillion, 3He as a fuel . ! Maybe the time has not yet come, but someday we will need what space can provide Space Habitat Design Shielding – Radiation Protection Considerations ! Shielding characterization ! Aereal density, d [gm/cm2] ! Physiological Needs ! Total amount of material matters ! Shielding ! Type of material: secondary ! Ionizing radiation & particles 3 2 ! Meteoritic impact ! 1 Earth Atmosphere: 10 gm/cm ! Atmospheric containment ! ! = mass / volume ! What pressure needed? ! ! = mass / (area ! thickness) ! Psychological Needs ! What mix of gasses? ! ! = m/(ax) = d / x ! Environment stress ! Gravitational acceleration ! x = thickness = d / ! ! Isolation ! Why it is needed 3 ! Personal space ! How to do it Substance ! [gm/cm ] d / !" x [cm] x [m] ! Illumination / Energy 3 ! Entertainment Lead 8 10 /8 125 1.25 ! ! Aesthetics Food / Water Styrofoam 0.01 103/10-2 105 103 ! Space Requirements Water 1 103/1 103 10 Shielding Types – Active Shielding Types – Passive ! Enough matter between us & radiation ! Examples
    [Show full text]
  • Flight Opportunities and Small Spacecraft Technology Program Updates NAC Technology, Innovation and Engineering Committee Meeting | March 19, 2020
    Flight Opportunities and Small Spacecraft Technology Program Updates NAC Technology, Innovation and Engineering Committee Meeting | March 19, 2020 Christopher Baker NASA Space Technology Mission Directorate Flight Opportunities and Small Spacecraft Technology Program Executive National Aeronautics and Space Administration 1 CHANGING THE PACE OF SPACE Through Small Spacecraft Technology and Flight Opportunities, Space Tech is pursuing the rapid identification, development, and testing of capabilities that exploit agile spacecraft platforms and responsive launch capabilities to increase the pace of space exploration, discovery, and the expansion of space commerce. National Aeronautics and Space Administration 2 THROUGH SUBORBITAL FLIGHT The Flight Opportunities program facilitates rapid demonstration of promising technologies for space exploration, discovery, and the expansion of space commerce through suborbital testing with industry flight providers LEARN MORE: WWW.NASA.GOV/TECHNOLOGY Photo Credit: Blue Origin National Aeronautics and Space Administration 3 FLIGHT OPPORTUNITIES BY THE NUMBERS Between 2011 and today… In 2019 alone… Supported 195 successful fights Supported 15 successful fights Enabled 676 tests of payloads Enabled 47 tests of payloads 254 technologies in the portfolio 86 technologies in the portfolio 13 active commercial providers 9 active commercial providers National Aeronautics and Space Administration Numbers current as of March 1, 2020 4 TECHNOLOGY TESTED IN SUBORBITAL Lunar Payloads ISS SPACE IS GOING TO EARTH ORBIT, THE MOON, MARS, AND BEYOND Mars 2020 Commercial Critical Space Lunar Payload Exploration Services Solutions National Aeronautics and Space Administration 5 SUBORBITAL INFUSION HIGHLIGHT Commercial Lunar Payload Services Four companies selected as Commercial Lunar Payload Services (CPLS) providers leveraged Flight Opportunities-supported suborbital flights to test technologies that are incorporated into their landers and/or are testing lunar landing technologies under Flight Opportunities for others.
    [Show full text]
  • Project Selene: AIAA Lunar Base Camp
    Project Selene: AIAA Lunar Base Camp AIAA Space Mission System 2019-2020 Virginia Tech Aerospace Engineering Faculty Advisor : Dr. Kevin Shinpaugh Team Members : Olivia Arthur, Bobby Aselford, Michel Becker, Patrick Crandall, Heidi Engebreth, Maedini Jayaprakash, Logan Lark, Nico Ortiz, Matthew Pieczynski, Brendan Ventura Member AIAA Number Member AIAA Number And Signature And Signature Faculty Advisor 25807 Dr. Kevin Shinpaugh Brendan Ventura 1109196 Matthew Pieczynski 936900 Team Lead/Operations Logan Lark 902106 Heidi Engebreth 1109232 Structures & Environment Patrick Crandall 1109193 Olivia Arthur 999589 Power & Thermal Maedini Jayaprakash 1085663 Robert Aselford 1109195 CCDH/Operations Michel Becker 1109194 Nico Ortiz 1109533 Attitude, Trajectory, Orbits and Launch Vehicles Contents 1 Symbols and Acronyms 8 2 Executive Summary 9 3 Preface and Introduction 13 3.1 Project Management . 13 3.2 Problem Definition . 14 3.2.1 Background and Motivation . 14 3.2.2 RFP and Description . 14 3.2.3 Project Scope . 15 3.2.4 Disciplines . 15 3.2.5 Societal Sectors . 15 3.2.6 Assumptions . 16 3.2.7 Relevant Capital and Resources . 16 4 Value System Design 17 4.1 Introduction . 17 4.2 Analytical Hierarchical Process . 17 4.2.1 Longevity . 18 4.2.2 Expandability . 19 4.2.3 Scientific Return . 19 4.2.4 Risk . 20 4.2.5 Cost . 21 5 Initial Concept of Operations 21 5.1 Orbital Analysis . 22 5.2 Launch Vehicles . 22 6 Habitat Location 25 6.1 Introduction . 25 6.2 Region Selection . 25 6.3 Locations of Interest . 26 6.4 Eliminated Locations . 26 6.5 Remaining Locations . 27 6.6 Chosen Location .
    [Show full text]
  • Human Behavior During Spaceflight - Videncee from an Analog Environment
    Journal of Aviation/Aerospace Education & Research Volume 25 Number 1 JAAER Fall 2015 Article 2 Fall 2015 Human Behavior During Spaceflight - videnceE From an Analog Environment Kenny M. Arnaldi Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, [email protected] Guy Smith Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, [email protected] Jennifer E. Thropp Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University - Daytona Beach, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.erau.edu/jaaer Part of the Applied Behavior Analysis Commons, Experimental Analysis of Behavior Commons, and the Other Astrophysics and Astronomy Commons Scholarly Commons Citation Arnaldi, K. M., Smith, G., & Thropp, J. E. (2015). Human Behavior During Spaceflight - videnceE From an Analog Environment. Journal of Aviation/Aerospace Education & Research, 25(1). https://doi.org/ 10.15394/jaaer.2015.1676 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Aviation/Aerospace Education & Research by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Arnaldi et al.: Human Behavior During Spaceflight - Evidence From an Analog Environment Introduction Four years after the launch of Sputnik, the world’s first artificial satellite, Yuri Gagarin became the first human to reach space (National Aeronautics and Space Administration [NASA], 2011a). The United States soon followed on the path of manned space exploration with Project Mercury. Although this program began with suborbital flights, manned spacecraft were subsequently launched into orbit around the Earth (NASA, 2012). With President Kennedy setting the goal of landing a man on the moon, NASA focused on short-duration orbital flights as a stepping-stone to lunar missions.
    [Show full text]
  • Cloud Download
    NASA Technical Memorandum 106110 Comparisons of Selected Laser Beam Power Missions to Conventionally Powered Missions John M. Bozek National Aeronautics and Space Administration Lewis Research Center Cleveland, Ohio and Steven R. Oleson, Geoffrey A. Landis, and Mark W. Stavnes Sverdrup Technology, Inc. Lewis Research Center Group Brook Park, Ohio Prepared for the First Annual Wireless Power Transmission Conference sponsored by the Center for Space Power, Texas A&M University San Antonio, Texas, February 23-25, 1993 NASA COMPARISONS OF SELECTED LASER BEAM POWER MISSIONS TO CONVENTIONALLY POWERED MISSIONS John M. Bozek National Aeronautics and Space Administration Lewis Research Center Cleveland, Ohio 44135 and Steven R. Oleson, Geoffrey A. Landis, and Mark W. Stavnes Sverdrup Technology, Inc. Lewis Research Center Group Brook Park, Ohio 44142 SUMMARY Earth-based laser sites beaming laser power to space assets have shown benefits over competing power system concepts for specific missions. Missions analyzed in this report that show benefits of laser beam power are low-Earth-orbit (LEO) to geosynchronous-Earth-orbit (GEO) transfer, LEO to low-lunar-orbit (LLO) cargo missions, and lunar-base power. Both laser- and solar-powered orbit transfer vehicles (OTV's) make a "tug" concept viable, which substantially reduces cumulative initial mass to LEO in comparison to chemical propulsion concepts. In addition, electric propulsion OTV's powered by a laser beam have shorter trip times to and from GEO than do competing OTV's powered solely by the Sun. A round-trip savings of 3 months was calculated for the use of a laser OTV tug instead of a solar OTV tug.
    [Show full text]
  • Mission Design for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter
    AAS 07-057 Mission Design for the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter Mark Beckman Goddard Space Flight Center, Code 595 29th ANNUAL AAS GUIDANCE AND CONTROL CONFERENCE February 4-8, 2006 Sponsored by Breckenridge, Colorado Rocky Mountain Section AAS Publications Office, P.O. Box 28130 - San Diego, California 92198 AAS-07-057 MISSION DESIGN FOR THE LUNAR RECONNAISSANCE ORBITER † Mark Beckman The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) will be the first mission under NASA’s Vision for Space Exploration. LRO will fly in a low 50 km mean altitude lunar polar orbit. LRO will utilize a direct minimum energy lunar transfer and have a launch window of three days every two weeks. The launch window is defined by lunar orbit beta angle at times of extreme lighting conditions. This paper will define the LRO launch window and the science and engineering constraints that drive it. After lunar orbit insertion, LRO will be placed into a commissioning orbit for up to 60 days. This commissioning orbit will be a low altitude quasi-frozen orbit that minimizes stationkeeping costs during commissioning phase. LRO will use a repeating stationkeeping cycle with a pair of maneuvers every lunar sidereal period. The stationkeeping algorithm will bound LRO altitude, maintain ground station contact during maneuvers, and equally distribute periselene between northern and southern hemispheres. Orbit determination for LRO will be at the 50 m level with updated lunar gravity models. This paper will address the quasi-frozen orbit design, stationkeeping algorithms and low lunar orbit determination. INTRODUCTION The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO) is the first of the Lunar Precursor Robotic Program’s (LPRP) missions to the moon.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Human Factors on Future Long Duration Human Space Exploration Missions En Route to Mars
    Open Archive TOULOUSE Archive Ouverte ( OATAO ) OATAO is an open access repository that collects the work of Toulouse researchers and makes it freely available over the web where possible. This is an author-deposited version published in : http://oatao.univ-toulouse.fr/ Eprints ID : 13827 To cite this version : Ferraioli, Giuseppe and Causse, Mickael and Lizy-Destrez, Stéphanie and Gourinat, Yves Habitability of manned vehicules : the impact of human factors on future long duration human space exploration missions en route to Mars. (2015) In: 64th International Astronautical Congress, Beijing, China, September 23-27, 2013, 2013 - 2013 (Beijing, China). Any correspondance concerning this service should be sent to the repository administrator: [email protected] HABITABILITY OF MANNED VEHICLES: THE IMPACT OF HUMAN FACTORS ON FUTURE LONG DURATION HUMAN SPACE EXPLORATION MISSIONS EN ROUTE TO MARS Giuseppe Ferraioli ISAE - Institut Sup´erieurde l'A´eronautiqueet de l'Espace, Italy, [email protected] Dr. Mickael Causse ISAE, France, [email protected] Mrs. St´ephanie Lizy-Destrez ISAE, France, [email protected] Prof. Yves Gourinat ISAE, France, [email protected] August 3, 2013 Abstract Placing humans in space for a long duration mission beyond Earth's neighborhood implies the design of a highly complex system to travel, live and work safely in the hostile environment of deep space. In order to identify all the constraints from both engineering and human sides, a meticulous system engineering approach has to be followed and the human sciences, including incorporation of ideas from artists, ergonomists and psychologists, have to be integrated in the very early stages of the mission design.
    [Show full text]
  • Cislunar Tether Transport System
    FINAL REPORT on NIAC Phase I Contract 07600-011 with NASA Institute for Advanced Concepts, Universities Space Research Association CISLUNAR TETHER TRANSPORT SYSTEM Report submitted by: TETHERS UNLIMITED, INC. 8114 Pebble Ct., Clinton WA 98236-9240 Phone: (206) 306-0400 Fax: -0537 email: [email protected] www.tethers.com Report dated: May 30, 1999 Period of Performance: November 1, 1998 to April 30, 1999 PROJECT SUMMARY PHASE I CONTRACT NUMBER NIAC-07600-011 TITLE OF PROJECT CISLUNAR TETHER TRANSPORT SYSTEM NAME AND ADDRESS OF PERFORMING ORGANIZATION (Firm Name, Mail Address, City/State/Zip Tethers Unlimited, Inc. 8114 Pebble Ct., Clinton WA 98236-9240 [email protected] PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR Robert P. Hoyt, Ph.D. ABSTRACT The Phase I effort developed a design for a space systems architecture for repeatedly transporting payloads between low Earth orbit and the surface of the moon without significant use of propellant. This architecture consists of one rotating tether in elliptical, equatorial Earth orbit and a second rotating tether in a circular low lunar orbit. The Earth-orbit tether picks up a payload from a circular low Earth orbit and tosses it into a minimal-energy lunar transfer orbit. When the payload arrives at the Moon, the lunar tether catches it and deposits it on the surface of the Moon. Simultaneously, the lunar tether picks up a lunar payload to be sent down to the Earth orbit tether. By transporting equal masses to and from the Moon, the orbital energy and momentum of the system can be conserved, eliminating the need for transfer propellant. Using currently available high-strength tether materials, this system could be built with a total mass of less than 28 times the mass of the payloads it can transport.
    [Show full text]
  • Habitation Module 26 July 2016 – NASA Advisory Council, Human Exploration and Operations Committee
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration Habitation Module 26 July 2016 – NASA Advisory Council, Human Exploration and Operations Committee Jason Crusan | Advanced Exploration Systems Director | NASA Headquarters 2 Human Exploration of Mars Is Hard Common Capability Needs Identified from Multiple Studies Days Reliable In-Space 800-1,100 44 min Transportation Total me crew is Maximum two- away from Earth – way communicaon for orbit missions all in 2me delay – 300 KW Micro-g and Radia2on Autonomous Opera2ons Total connuous transportaon power 130 t Heavy-LiA Mass 20-30 t Long Surface Stay Multiple Ability to 500 Days Launches per land large mission payloads Surface Operations Dust Toxicity and 100 km 11.2 km/s Long Range Explora2on Earth Entry Speed 20 t Oxygen produced for ascent to orbit - ISRU 3 The Habitation Development Challenge HABITATATION CAPABILITY Days 800-1,100 Habitation Systems – Total me crew is AES/ISS/STMD away from Earth – • Environmental Control & Life Support for orbit missions all in • Autonomous Systems Micro-g and Radia2on Integrated • EVA testing on ISS • Fire Safety • Radiation Protection Habitation Systems - Crew Health – HRP Long Surface Stay • Human Research 500 Days • Human Performance • Exercise PROVING GROUND Validation in cislunar space • Nutrition Habitation Capability– NextSTEP BAA / Int. Partners • Studies and ground prototypes of pressurized volumes 4 Specific Habitation Systems Objectives TODAY FUTURE Habitation The systems, tools, and protec:ons that allow Systems Elements humans to live and work
    [Show full text]
  • NASA's Lunar Orbital Platform-Gatway
    The Space Congress® Proceedings 2018 (45th) The Next Great Steps Feb 28th, 9:00 AM NASA's Lunar Orbital Platform-Gatway Tracy Gill NASA/KSC Technology Strategy Manager Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings Scholarly Commons Citation Gill, Tracy, "NASA's Lunar Orbital Platform-Gatway" (2018). The Space Congress® Proceedings. 17. https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings/proceedings-2018-45th/presentations/17 This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Space Congress® Proceedings by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA’s Lunar Orbital Platform- Gateway Tracy Gill NASA/Kennedy Space Center Exploration Research & Technology Programs February 28, 2018 45th Space Congress Space Policy Directive-1 “Lead an innovative and sustainable program of exploration with commercial and international partners to enable human expansion across the solar system and to bring back to Earth new knowledge and opportunities. Beginning with missions beyond low-Earth orbit, the United States will lead the return of humans to the Moon for long-term exploration and utilization, followed by human missions to Mars and other destinations.” 2 LUNAR EXPLORATION CAMPAIGN 3 4 STRATEGIC PRINCIPLES FOR SUSTAINABLE EXPLORATION • FISCAL REALISM • ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY Implementable in the near-term with the buying
    [Show full text]
  • Workstation Designs for a Cis-Lunar Deep Space Habitat
    Workstation Designs for a Cis-lunar Deep Space Habitat A. Scott Howe, PhD1 Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, 4800 Oak Grove Drive, Pasadena, California 91109 Using the International Standard Payload Rack (ISPR) system, a suite of workstations required for deep space missions have been proposed to fill out habitation functions in an International Space Station (ISS) derived Cis-lunar Deep Space Habitat. This paper introduces the functional layout of the Cis-lunar habitat design, and describes conceptual designs for modular deployable work surfaces, General Maintenance Workstation (GMWS), In-Space Manufacturing Workstation (ISMW), Intra-Vehicular Activity Telerobotics Work Station (IVA-TRWS), and Galley / Wardroom. Nomenclature AES = NASA Advanced Exploration Systems project ATHLETE = All-Terrain Hex-Limbed Extra-Terrestrial Explorer robotic mobility system CTB = Cargo Transfer Bag D-RATS = NASA Desert Research and Technology Studies DSH = Deep Space Habitat EAM = Exploration Augmentation Module EXPRESS = EXpedite the PRocessing of Experiments for Space Station GMWS = General Maintenance Work Station HDU = Habitat Demonstration Unit HERA = Human Exploration Research Analog ISMW = In-Space Manufacturing Work Station ISPR = International Standard Payload Rack ISIS = International Subrack Interface Standard ISS = International Space Station IVA = Intravehicular Activity MPCV = Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle MPLM = Multi-Purpose Logistics Module PLSS = Personal Life Support System RAF = Random Access Frames TRWS = Telerobotics
    [Show full text]