Magellan Proj·Ect Plan

Home , Aerobraking, Galileo (spacecraft), Gordon Pettengill, Harold Masursky, Magellan (spacecraft), Mapping of Venus

J'c_,____ ..,._\

. . " . - . ------. . ------~ ---. -- MAGELLAN PROJ·ECT PLAN

. · { VENUS RADAR MAPPER ) - . ~\7} lJ ' --~- 8'J ':_ I t '

JPL D- 814 ·, ,:.-1.;~<~- / ..... -.!_ -/ PAC~FIC REGIONAL // PLtU\~ETA.RV DATA CENTER · I ("". 630-1

" Venus Radar Mapper (VRM)

Project Plan

November 1983

National Aeronautics and Space Administration JPL Jet Propulsion Laboratory ,..\ California Institute of Technology ' J "--· Pasadena, California

JPL D-814 ,· "-

~:·'

PROJECT PLAN FOR THE VENUS RADAR MAPPER (VRM) MISSION

Approval of this Project Plan indicates acceptance of Project and Program responsibilities, commitment of the necessary funding by NASA Headquarters and allocation by the JPL Project Office, and commitment of the requisite facil ities and manpower by the participating NASA Centers and JPL to implement the Project as described.

APPROVED BY:

~~---,----:--~--'/JI--"Jii"'f w (/. tJtv 1-lhf1 Gerpheide, Rodney A. Mills, Manager Project VRM Program Jet Propulsion Laboratory National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Lew Allen, Director Jet Propulsion Laboratory

for Space Science and Applications

iii t

i· l.! 630.,.1 -~

0 DISTRIBUTION

JPL Albee, A. L. Cal tech 170-25 Laeser, R. P. 264-443 Allen, L. 180-904 Lavoie, s. 168-427 Baker, D. A. 156-220 LeMere, M. T. 156-ll9 Bauer, T. A. 156-246 Litty, E. c. 198-326 Berman, A. L. 506-243 Lopez, N. 233-208 Blue, J. E. (3) 161-137 Lyman, P. T. 264-800 Bollman, W. E. 264-664 Lyons, D. T. 156-248 Borden, T. 158-224 Mallis, R. K. 506-209 Burow, N. A. (3) 161-228 Mathison, R. P. 238-540 Cannova, R. D. (3) 230-108 McGlinchey, L. F. 198-326 Casani, E. K. 186-133 Miller, F·. 180-404 Chahine, M. T. 180-904 Miller, J. E. 72-101 Clark, J. (3) 168-427 Mohcm, S. N. 264-664 Climes, N. s. 144-119 Montgomery, L. c. 180-402 Conrad, A. G. 264-316 Nybakken, D. 161-213 Cowgill, P. 144--218 Ogle, s. 264"':'316 Cutting, E. (3) 156-217 Parker, G. L. 264-316 Dallas, S. s. 264-316 Parks, R. J. 180-904 Dipprey, D. F. 157-205 Piereson, R. G. 156-119 Dombrowski, s. 264-316 Pieri, L. 264-115 Downhower, W. J. 180-900 Plamondon, J. A. (3) 158-224 Eddy, N. R. 111-141 Polansky, R. G. 180-404 Eidem, C. 264-316 Quinn, D. F. (4) 264-316 Esposito, P. B. 264-664 Quinn, J. D. 144-218 Figueroa, 0. 511-303 Reiz, E. C. 264-316 Flores, D. 264-316 Rolfe, E. G. 198-326 Gant, D. T. 202-204 Ross, D. s. 180-402 Gerpheide, J. H. (15) 264-316 Rossing, D. 233-301 Geuy, C. E. 183-701 Salazar, R. 233-301 Gianopulos, G. N. 180-404 Savino, J. L. (3) 198-112D Giberson, W. E. 180-401 Shaw, L. T. 233-307 Gordon, P. 125-224 Shepherd, J. H. 183-701 Green, R. R. 180-404 Shipley, W. s. 180-601 Haynes, N. R. 264-626 Slonski, J. P. 233-307 Heacock, R. L. 179-112 Smith, J. C. 156-248 Held, D. N. 183-701 So11ock, S. G. 158-205 Hendricks, G. 183-701 Stephenson, R. R. 198-102 Hixon, D. J. 156-220 Stevens, R. 264-800 Hartter, R. L. 161-228 Thornton, Jr., T. H. 198.,...226 James, W. W. 168-222 Tyler, S. 150-300 Jin, M. Y. 156-119 Uphoff, C. W. 156-248 Johnson, C. W. 264-800 Victor, W. K. 180-600 Jordan, R. L. 183-701 Wiesbach, D. c. 264-316 Johnson, W. T. K. 183-701 Wilson, M. 264-664 Joo, T. 183-701 Winn, C. F. 183-701 Kellum, E. E. 264-316 Wirth, Jr., v. A. (3) 179-206 Klemetson, R. w. 125-224 Wolin, W. · 179-206 () Kobrick, M. 183-701 Wuest, W. s. 198-220 Kwok, J. H. 156-248 (Also see Project Science Group)

v 630-1

DISTRIBUTION (Cont'd)

NASA Headquarters NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center Washington, DC 20546 Greenbelt, MD 20771

Boyce, J. Code EL Carr, F. Code 400.2 Briggs, G. A. Code EL Castellano, J. Code MSD NASA/Lewis Research Center Clark, H. Code MSD 21000 Brookpark Road Diaz, A. V. Code EL Cleveland, OH 44135 Force, C. Code TN Gruhl, W. Code BRG Borsody, J. ( 10) Hibbard, D. Code EPR Holcomb, L. Code RC Hughes Aircraft Company Hornstein, R. Code·TN Space and Communications Group Konkel, R. M. Code EP P.O. Box 92919 Kukowski, E. Code E Worldway Postal Center La Croix, S. Code BRD Los Angeles, CA 90009 Madison, J. Code C McGuire, J. Code MCN Edgerton, A. (10) Mills, R. A. (5) Code EL Montoya, E. Code EL Martin Marietta Corporation Pinkler, D. G. Code EPR Denver Aerospace Quaide, W. Code EL P.O. Box 179 Schulze, N. Code DP Denver, CO 80201 Soens, R. P. Code BRD Strobel, G. Code EL Brown, C. (10) Wallgren, K. Code RC Zarlengo, G. .Code EPR (Also see Project Science Group)

VRM Project Science Group

Dr. R. Stephen Saunders, VRM Project Scientist, Chairman JPL/ 264-316 _

Mr. Joseph M. Boyce, VRM Program Scientist, Co-Chairman NASA-HQ/Code EL

Dr. Michel Lefebvre, PI, VRM Gravity Investigation Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales Group de Recherches de Geodesie Spatiale 8, Av. E. Belin 31055 Toulouse Cedex France

Dr. Gordon H. Pettengill, PI, VRM Radar Investigation Massachusetts Institute of Technology Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences MS )7-241 Cambridge, MA 02139

I I ,630~ 1 c Dr. William L. Sjogren, PI, VRM Gravity Investigation JPL/264-664

Dr. Georges Balmino, CO-I, VRM Gravity Investigation Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales Group de Recherches de Geodesie Spatiale 8, Av. E. Belin 31055 Toulouse Cedex France

Dr. Merton E. Davies, Co-I, VRM Radar Investigation The Rand Corporation 1700 Main Street Santa Monica, CA 90406

Dr. Charles Elachi, Co-I, VRM Radar Investigation JPL/183-335

Dr. James W. Head, III, Co-I, VRM Radar Investigation Brown University Department of Geological Sciences P.O. Box 1846 Providence, RI 02912

Dr. Harold Masursky, Co-I, VRM Radar Investigation U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Division 2255 North Gemini Drive Flagstaff, AZ 86001

Dr. Roger J. Phillips, Co-I, VRM Radar Investigation Southern Methodist University Department of Geological Sciences Dallas, TX 75275

Dr. R. Keith Raney, Co-I, VRM Radar Investigation Canada Center for Remote Sensing 2464 Sheffield Road Ottawa, Ontario KlA OY7 Canada

Dr. Laurence A. Soderblom, Sherman Fairchild Distinguished Scholar, Caltech, and Co-I, VRM Radar Investigation U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Division 2255 North Gemini Drive Flagstaff, AZ 86001

Dr. Sean C. Solomon, Co-I, VRM Radar Investigation Massachusetts Institute of Technology MS 54-522 Cambridge, MA 02139

vii c.630"'! 1

Mr. H. Ray Stanley, Co-I, VRM Radar Investigation NASA/WFC/Code DAS

Dr. G. Leonard Tyler, Co-I, VRM Radar Investigation Stanford University Stanford Electronics Laboratories Center for Radar Astronomy Durant Bldg., Room 232 Stanford, CA 94305

Dr. Stewart Nozette California Space Institute M.S. A-030 University of California at San Diego _La Jolla, CA 92093

NOTES

Additional copies of this document may be obtained by calling the JPL Vellum File Order Desk, FTS-792-6222.

Contact M. A. Jasnow (M/S 264-316) regarding additions, deletions or changes to this list.

viii I a

a Venus Radar Mapper in Orbit

ix CONTENTS

SECTION

I. INTRODUCTION • • • • 1-1 A. IDENTIFICATION • 1-1 B. SCIENTIFIC BACKGROUND 1-1 C. PROGRAMMATIC BACKGROUND 1-1 D. SCGPE OF PROJECT PLAN 1-3 E. CHANGE IMPLEMENTATION 1-4

II. PROJECT PLAN SUMMARY • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2-1

III. SCIENCE PROJECT RATIONALE AND SCIENCE AND MISSION OBJECTIVES • 3-1

A. SCIENCE RATIONALE 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . . . . 3-l

l. Status of Knowledge 0 0 0 0 0 0 3-1

2. Major Unanswered Questions 0 3-2 ~ B. PROJECT OBJECTIVES 0 0 0 0 0 0 3-3 c. SCIENCE OBJECTIVES 0 0 0 . . 3-3 D. INVESTIGATION OBJECTIVES . 3-3

IV. SUMMARY OF TECHNICAL PLAN 4-l A. VENUS RADAR MAPPING MISSION 4-1 1. Mission Phases • . • • 4-1 2. Mission Description 4-1 3. Mission Domain • • • 4-3 4. Approach Trajectory 4-3 5. Mapping Orbit 4-3 6. SAR Coverage • 4-6 7. Orbit Determination Strategy • • • • • • • • • • • • 4-6 B. SYSTEMS 4-8 1. Science and Mission Design System 4-8 2. Spacecraft System 4-12

xi 630 ... 1

CONTENTS (Continued)

SECTION

3. Radar System ••• 4-21 4. Mission Operations System (MOS) 4-34 5. Tracking and Data System (TDS) 4-39 6. Launch Vehicle System (LVS) 4-40 c. TECHNOLOGY PLAN • • • • 4-42 1. Radar System • • ••••• 4-42 2. Spacecraft System 4-43 D. FACILITIES •••••• 4-43 FLIGHT OPERATIONS PLAN • 4-44 1. Launch Operations 2. Mission Operations Organization and Inter-

relationships • • • • o • • • • • • • 4-45 3. Sequence Design and Implementation • 4-48 4. Data Acquisition and Generation 4-48 5. Data Processing 4-48 F. END-TO-END INFORMATION SYSTEM 4-50 ,.. "'· RELEASE OF MISSION RESULTS 4-52 1. Scientific Reporting • 4-52 2. Orbital Activities •• 4-55 H. ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT •• 4-5'5

v. t1ANAGEMENT PLAN • • o • 5-1 A. PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND ROLES • • • 5-l 1. Project Manager ••••• 5-1 2. Project Scientist •••••• 5-2 3. Science and Mission Design Manager • 5-2 4. Radar System Manager ••• 5-4 5. Spacecraft System Manager 5-5 6. Mission Operations System Manager 5-6 7. Tracking and Data Systems Manager 5-6 8. Launch Vehicle System Manager 5-7

xii I 6 3 0.,. 1 0 CONTENTS (Continued) SECTION

9. Staff Positions . . . . . 5-8 10. Project Representatives 5-10 .B. PROJECT MANAGEMENT ...... 5-11 l. Project Staff ...... 5-ll 2. Project Teams . . . • ...... 5-11 3. Project Science Group ...... 5-12 4. Spacecraft System Management ...... 5-15 s. Radar System Management ...... 5-16 6. Interface Control . . . . . 5-17 7. Launch Vehicle Interface . . . . . 5-1~ c. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION ...... 5-19 l. Contraints ...... 5-19 2. Technical Division Responsibilities 5-20 3. Flight Project Support Office ...... 5-21 4. Memoranda of Agreement . . . . . 5-21 r·...... D. REPORTING . . . . 5-22 F.:. DOCUMENTATION PLAN ...... 5-22 F. STANDING REVIEW BOARD . . . . . 5-21 G. RESOURCES REPORTING ...... 5-23 1. Program Operating Plan ...... 5-2:3 2. Project Management Report ...... 5-23 3. NASA Form 533 ...... 5-2:3

VI. PROCUREMENT STRATEGY ...... 6-1 A. PROCUREMENT APPROACH ...... 6-L B. SPACECRAFT SYSTEM CONTRACT SCOPE OF WORK . 6-1 c. RADAR SYSTEM CONTRACT SCOPE OF WORK . . . . 6-2

VII. PROJECT SCHEDULE ...... 7-1 A. VRM PROJECT MASTER SCHEDULE (LEVEL 2) 7-1 B. VRM PROJECT SYSTEMS SCHEDULES (LEVEL 3) . . . . . 7-1 a c. VRM PROJECT SUPPORTING SCHEDULES ...... 7-l

xiii 1n I 6 3 0""} ' .

CONTENTS (Continued) ~ VIII. RESOURCES PLAN •••.••••••• 8-l A. PROJECT FUNDING AND REPORTING 8-1 R. PROJECT MANAGEMENT RESERVE • • 8-l c. ALLOWANCE FOR PROGRAM ADJUSTMENT • • 8-1. D. RESOURCES ESTIMATES 8-1

IX. MANAGEMENT REVIEW 9-L A. PROGRAM REVIEWS 9-1 B. PROJECT REQUIREMENTS 9-1 C. THE PROJECT REVIEW PLAN 9-1

x. CONTROLLED ITEMS 10-1 A. APPROVAL AUTHORITY • 10-1 B. CONTROLLED MILESTONES 10-2

XC. RELIABILITY, QUALITY ASSURANCE AND SAFETY 11-1 A. RELIABILITY AND QUALITY ASSURANCE (R&QA) • 11-1 () 1. Reliability Assurance Program • 11-1 2. Quality Assurance Program •••• 11-2 3. Implementation of R&QA Progams 11-3 B. SAFETY PROGRAH 11-3 l. Safety Program Requirements • 11-3 2. Implementation of the Safety Program 11-4 3. Primary and Shared Safety Responsibilities 11-5

REFERENCES SECTION I INTRODUCTION • • • • 1-5 SECTION lV SUMMARY OF TECHNICAL PLAN 4-56 SECTION V MANAGEMENT PLAN 5-24 SECTION IX MANAGEMENT REVIEW 9-2 SECTION XI RELIABILITY, QUALITY ASSURANCE AND SAFETY 11-6

xiv

I I CONTENTS (Continued)

APPENDICES A. Glossary ...... A-1 B. Memorandum of Agreement Between International Solar Polar Mission and Venus Radar Mapper Mission dated 1 August 1983 ...... •...... B-1 c. Memorandum of Agreement for Use of the Advanced Digital SAR Processor (ADSP) by the Shuttle Imaging Radar (SIR) Program and the Venus Radar Mapper (VRM) Program dated 6 October 1983 ••••••••• C-1 D. Memorandum of Agreement for Support by the Flight Project Support Office to the Venus Radar Mapper Project dated October 1983 ...... D-1 E. Memorandum of Agreement between the Galileo and

VRM Projects . 0 ...... E-1

Figures 4-1. Mission Domain - 975 kg S/C Dry Mass 4-4 4-2. Sample Type I Interplanetary Trajectory • 4-3. Venus Orbit Insertion Geometry 4-5 4-4. Mapping Orbit Geometry 4-7 4-5. Mission Timeline 4-7 4-6. VRM SMDS Organization 4-10 4-7. SFS Launch Configuration 4-13 4-8. SFS Cruise Configuration 4-14 4-9. SFS Mapping Configuration • 4-15 4-10. SFS Functional Block Diagram 4-17 4-11. Radar Sensor Subsystem Block Diagram 4-24 4-12. Altimeter Antenna Pyramidal Horn . . . . . 4-28 lf-13. VRM Radar Sensor Support Equipment 4-30 4-14. RDPS Block Diagram 4-31 Lf-15. Centaur G Configuration • 4-41 4-16. VRM Operations Organization • 4-46 4-17. Information Flow Between Teams 4-47 4-18. VRM Data Flow • • • • • • • • • • 4-SJ 5-1. VRM Project Organizational Structure 5-2 7-1. VRM Project Implementation Schedule (Level 2) • 7-'2.

XV 630-1

CONTENTS (Continued)

Tables

4-1. Mapping Orbit Parameters 4-5 4-2. Other Orbit-Related Parameters 4-1) Delta-V Budget 4-8 4-4. VRM Science Investigations 4-9 4-5. Telecommunications Link Summary • 4-18 4-6. VRM Flight Mass Allocation Summary 4-22 Radar Sensor Design Derivation 4-23 4-8. VRM TDA Coverage Requirements 4-4q 4-9. Providers of VRM Ground-Based EElS Capabilities • 4-54 8-1. VRM Project Total Obligations Planning Estimate Summary •• 8-2 8-2. VRM Project Development Obligation Planning Estimate 8-3 8-3. VRM Project Operations Obligation Planning Estimate 8-4 8-4. VRM Project Development In-House Workforce Planning

Estimate ...... o • • • • • • 8-4 8-5. VRM Project Operations In-House Workforce Planning (j- Estimate 8-5 11-1. Safety Responsibilities •••• ll-5

xvi .. 630~1

However, continuing budget problems within the government required reduced levels of Government spending and thus required a lowered NASA budget. Ongoing problems with the Space Transporation System forced NASA to concentrate its limited funds in that area and thus precluded the continuation of the VOIR project. The project was officially canceled in January 1982.

Work was then started to determine if there was a way to do a less expensive Venus radar mapping mission that would preserve the primary science objectives of the VOIR mission. This new mission was to concentrate on solid body objectives only and so the atmospheric experiments were dropped from consideration. Analysis of the VOIR project showed that a major driver on the system characteristics, and thus on the cost of the mission, was the requirement to operate the spacecraft from a low altitude circular orbit. However, studies had shown that it would be possible to do the radar mapping from an elliptical orbit but with variable resolution and SAR look angle. Since this was fundamentally no different from the viewing geometry limitations that had been imposed on optical imaging systems used on previous missions, provided that the SAR look angle stayed within limits that would preclude layover of the Venusian topography in the radar images, this was not thought to be a significant problem. Designing a spacecraft and mission around an elliptical mapping orbit provided many cost savings. Further cost savings were found when it was decided to build the spaceraft from residual flight hardware or standard designs wherever possible. Additional.cost savings were found in the area of Mission Operations and Control by utilizing standard spacecraft operating sequences. The result of this activity was a replacement mission for the VOIR mission, at less than half the cost of VOIR, ~. that would satisfy the primary Venus scientific goals (Ref. 1-11). The name \___. of this new mission was Venus Radar Mapper (VRM). This mission and its objectives were endorsed by the NASA Solar System Exploration Committee (SSEC) on June 28, 1982 and it was further endorsed by the Committee on Lunar and Planetary Exploration (COMPLEX) on July 12, 1982.

The VRM project was proposed as a new start by NASA and put forth by the administration in its budget for FY 1984. The project received official approval by the Congress later in 1983. Final contracts with the principal contractors were let with Hughes and Martin Marietta in the fall of 1983. The contracts with the Project Science Investigators are under review and revision for VRM and are expected to be completed in the summer of 1984.

D. SCOPE OF PROJECT PLAN

This Plan defines the Venus Radar Mapper 1988 mission. The single space craft will be launched from Cape Canaveral, Florida, by NASA Space Transporta tion System using the Shuttle Orbiter/Centaur G combination in April 1988 to a Venus Orbit insertion in late July 1988. The end of the nominal mission is planned for April 1989.

Technical and implementation information related to the spacecraft con tained in Sections IV and V, such as the description, mission design, trajec tory characteristics, mission events and maneuvers, is the result of studies at JPL and elsewhere and must be considered as representative or typical data t"""'· which is not final in any sense. \.._ -·

1-3 \~ 630-1

Technical information on the science aspects of the mission is based upon pro~osals submitted by those scientists who were selected as Principal Invest igators and is not official.

The Plan presents neither requirements for additional studies nor conclu sions of the system design proposals.

Appendixes contain a glossary of acronyms and various memoranda of agreement between the Project and other projects and programs.

E. CHANGE IMPLEMENTATION

This Plan will be updated only in case of significant changes pertinent to the Project's success (e.g. a change of major objectives or launch date). Updates of minor technical, management, and editorial changes to the Plan are not required.

1-4 11 •

SECTION I

INTRODUCTION

A. IDENTIFICATION

Venus Radar Mapper (VRM) is the Project title (UPN No. 844) designated by the NASA Office of Space Science and Applications (OSSA) in its request for a plan under the NASA Solar System Exploration Program. The objective of the Program, as expressed in the Planetary Exploration Program Approval Document (PAD) (Ref. 1-1), is the scientific exploration of the Solar System (excluding the Sun and Earth) utilizing Earth-based observations, spacecraft, laboratory studies and theoretical research.

The elements of the Program are consistent with the following goals:

(1) To further understanding of the origin and evolution of the Solar System.

(2) To further our understanding of the origin and evolution of life.

(3) To further our understanding of Earth by comparative studies of the other planets.

The VID1 mission with an orbiting spacecraft to investigate the surface of Venus has strong relevance to each of these goals.

B. SCIENTIFIC BACKGROUND

Ground-based radar, microwave, infrared and optical measurements have pro vided increasingly preciseodata on the Venus surface and upper atmosphere. Significant advancements in our knowledge of Venus have been made in recent years through studies by three U.S. flyby missions (Mariners 2, 5 and 10) and by the USSR Venera series of orbiters, atmospheric probes and landers, and the Pioneer Venus Orbiter and Pioneer Venus Probes. These spacecraft confirmed that the environment at the surface of Venus is quite unlike that of Earth and added to au~ knowledge concerning its atmosphere. Earth-based radar data and Venera images revealed that the planet's surface is marked by geological features suggestive of impact cratering, volcanism and tectonic activity.

A science rationale is provided in Section III.A.

C. PROGRAMMATIC BACKGROUND

A mission to obtain a global radar map of Venus has long been advocated by the planetary science community (Refs. 1-2, 1-3, and 1-4). This need for radar exists because the cloud cover on Venus prevents any other remote sensing technique from seeing the surface of the planet. Earth-based radar observations partially overcome this problem, but the great distance between Earth and Venus and commensurabilities between the orbits of these two planets

1-1 \~ restrict the resolution and coverage that can be obtained with this type of observation. Additionally, most previous spacecraft missions to Venus had concentrated on studies of the Venusian atmosphere and had to a great extent neglected studies of the solid body of the planet. This left the geology of Venus as a great unknown in the comparative study of the planets. In 1978 the National Research Council Space Science Board, in their report entitled Strategy for the Exploration of the Inner Planets: 1977-1987, identified the acquisition of a global map of the topography and morphology of the Venusian surface as the most important goal for Venus exploration in that time frame.

Early studies of a Venus radar mapping mission in the late 1960's and early 1970's generally concentrated on observations that could be made from a spacecraft orbiting the planet in a circular orbit (Refs. 1-2 and 1-5 through 1-9). These studies were carried out under the direction of NASA and JPL, and they proved the feasibility of performing geologic mapping of Venus from space. These studies dealt with missions that would be launched in the early 1980's to take advantage of the particularly good launch periods that were available at that time. Continued refinement of these studies lead to the establishment of Venus Orbiting Imaging Radar (VOIR) as a potential NASA new start.

Other priorities within NASA and the government prevented the approval of VOIR at a time which would allow use of the good launch periods. This lead to the analysis of missions with launch dates in the later 1980's when the launch periods were not as favorable. These launch periods, coupled with inadequate launch vehicle capabilities, prevented a mission using an all propulsive orbit insertion system. However, analysis showed that it would be possible to use a propulsive orbit insertion system to inject the spacecraft into an initial highly elliptical orbit and then to use aerodynamic braking to place the spacecraft into its final mapping orbit. This system was called aerobraking and offered the lowest cost and highest on-orbit mass for any system studied for these launch periods (Ref. 1-10).

NASA proceeded with the VOIR mission on that basis and in October 1978 issued an Announcement of Opportunity (AO) to the scientific community to participate in this mission. A team of investigators was selected in August 1979 based on proposals submitted in response to that AO and included scientists who would use radar, altimeter and gravity data to study the solid body of Venus and a group of investigators who would suppply their own instruments to study the planet's atmosphere. Contracts were also established with aerospace companies to study the design of the spacecraft and the imaging radar system. The Martin Marietta Corporation and the Hughes Aircraft Company were selected to do design studies of the spacecraft, and the Hughes Aircraft Company and the Goodyear Aerospace Corporation were selected to do design studies of the imaging radar system. Following the completion of these design studies and a review of the contractor's proposals for further work, two contractors were selected to build the hardware for the mission. The Hughes Aircraft Company was selected in November 1981 as the radar system contractor, and the Martin Marietta Corporation was selected in February 1982 as the spacecraft system contractor.

1-2 630~1 C· REFERENCES 1-1. Planetary Exploration Program Approval Document, Research and Development, Code No. 84-840, NASA, latest issue.

1-2. R. S. Saunders, L. D. Friedman and T. W. Thompson, Mission Planning for Remote Exploration of the Surface of Venus.

1-3. Future Exploration of Venus (Post-Pioneer Venus 1978), NASA TM X-62, 450, Ames Research Center, January 1976.

1-4. Science Working Group Report for Venus Orbiting Imaging Radar 1984 Mission, JPL Internal Document 660-75, November 1978.

1-5. Preliminary Analysis of Venus Orbit Radar Mission, Illinois Institute of Technology Research Institute, IITRI-M-32, 1970.

1-6. Venus Orbital Imaging Radar (VOIR) Study, JPL Internal Document 760-89, November 1973.

1-7. Orbital Radar Mapping Mission to Venus, Martin-Marietta/Environmental Research Institute of Michigan, NASA CR-114640, 1973.

1-:8 0 A Study of Modifications to the Pioneer Venus Spacecraft, for ••• Venus Orbiting Imaging Radar Missions, Hughes Aircraft Corporation, D6909 SCT 6045M, August 1976. ~ '--- l-9. Venus Orbital Imaging Radar, 1983 Mission and System Study, JPL Internal Document 660-64, October 1977.

1-10. S. S. Dallas, VOIR Aerobraking Mission, Vol. 1: Mission Analysis and Navigation, JPL Internal Document 630-11, October 30, 1980.

1-11. J. H. Kwok and S. S. Dallas, Mission and Trajectory Design for a Venus Radar Mapper Mission, AIAA-83-03,48, presented at AIAA 21st Aerospace Sciences Meeting, January 10-13, 1983, Reno, Nevada.

1-5 \~ SECTION II

PROJECT PLAN SUMMARY

The overall scientifc objective for the 1988 VRM mission is to map the surface of Venus with resolution and coverage sufficient to locate and identify the dominant geologic structures. This objective will be addressed by the use of Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR). The SAR will be used to produce radar images of the surface of Venus and to characterize its radar reflectivity. The SAR electronics will also be used to obtain altimetery data that will characterize the shape of the planet. Tracking of the spacecraft will be used to deduce the gravitational field of the planet. Taken together tese data will allow the members of the VR}1 science team to understand the major geologic processes occuring on Venus and to deduce its geologic history.

The VRM mission will be launched to Venus on type-1 trajectory during a 20-day launch period in April 1988. Following an interplanetary flight time of approximately four months the spacecraft will arrive at Venus in July 1988. A short time period following Venus Orbit Insertion (VOl) will be used to check out the spacecraft and radar system and verify operational readiness. The spacecraft orbital period will be on the order of three hours, with the part of the orbit near periapsis being used for acquisition of radar data and the remainder of the orbit being used to transmit that tape recorded data to the Earth. A single antenna will be used for the radar system and for the downlink telemetry system. The nominal mission is scheduled to end when the spacecraft goes into solar conjunction during April 1989. A~though an extended mission is not formally planned, the spacecraft is being designed so that it does not preclude the possibility for such a mission.

The science payload and the science team for VRM are a subset of the investigators selected for the Venus Orbiting Imaging Radar (VOIR) mission. The VOIR science payload and science team were selected in August 1979 from proposals received in response to Announcement of Opportunity (AO) No. OSS-5-78 issued in October 1978. Those science investigations included proposals to do experiements similar to the ones planned for VRM and an additional set of atmospheric investigations. Following the offical cancellation of VOIR in Janaury 1982 a restructured and less expensive mission, VRM, was designed. This project was planned to undertake a less complicated mission and would use residual spacecraft hardware whenever possible. Due to the nature of this mission the atmospheric experiments were delected from the VRM science payload, and other investigations were combined and abbreviated. The VRM science payload and science teams are the result of that activity.

The VRM mission will use a single spacecraft launched by a Shuttle/Centaur launch vehicle. The VRM spacecraft will be assembled primarily from flight-qualified residual hardware. The Bus and High-Gain Antenna will come from the Voyager project. The Tape Recorder and On-Board Computer will come from the Galileo project. Various other components will come from these projects, from other past projects, and from the NASA lists of standard spacecraft hardware and designs. The spacecraft is three-axis stabilized using a combination of momentum wheels, gyros, and attitude control thrusters. VOl will be performed by a STAR-48 solid rocket motor.

2-1 I 6 3 0"" 1

Telemetry and tracking coverage requirements vary from two eight-hour passes per week during interplanetary cruise up to continuous coverage during the nominal Venus orbital phase. Interplanetary cruise requirements may be satisfied by the use of a single 34-meter Deep Space Network (DSN) antenna, but the orbital phase will require the use of the 64-meter stations or arrayed 34-meter stations. Spacecraft engineering data will be studied by the Mission Control Team, the Spacecraft Engineering Team, and the Project Science Group as it is processed during the mission. Radar engineering data and calibration ima~es will be studied by those groups as well as by the Radar Engineering Team. Scientific data will be studied by the appropriate science team as these data are received from the spacecraft and processed by the ground data system.

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) has been assigned the management of this project for the NASA Office of Space Science and Applications. JPL is responsible for overall management and integration functions, with the construction of the spacecraft and its subsystems being performed by outside contractors. The spacecraft will be built by the Martin Marrietta Corporation and the radar system will be built by the Hughes Aircraft Company. The NASA Space Transporation System (STS) will be managed by the NASA Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center. Management of the Centaur development, production, and integra tion of the VRM spacecraft to Centaur is the responsibility of the NASA Lewis Research Center (LeRC). Th~ NASA LeRC is also respon~ible for assuring that the spacecraft is in compliance with Space Shuttle payload requirements. JPL has been designated by OSTDS as the lead center responsible for all Tracking and Data Acquisition support for the VRM project. The data collecting and processing activity will use the.NASA Spaceflight Tracking and Data Network (STDN), the DSN, the NASA Communications Network, and the Mission Control and Computing facilities.

Formal project reviews, systems reviews, design reviews and readiness reviews are scheduled in this document.

There are no environmental impact issues associated with this project.

The cost committments for VRM are contained in Section VIII. The development part through launch plus 30 days, excluding STS costs, is $267,900,000 including the management reserves, in real year dollars. The mission operations and data analysis part is $26,700,00, again including management reserve and using real year dollars. The Project total committment is $294,600,000.

.r) /

2-2 630~1

SECTION III

SCIENCE RATIONALE AND PROJECT, SCIENCE AND MISSION OBJECTIVES

A. SCIENCE RATIONALE

1. Status of Knowledge

Observation and measurement of the planets are critical to under standing the initial conditions in the solar nebula, the processes of formation and subsequent evolution of planetary bodies, the presently active processes of the solar system, and the relationships between these initial conditions and processes and those of the Earth. The VRM mission provides the opportunity to extend our present data and understanding of Venus for substantial progress toward this fundamental goal.

Venus has long been regarded as Earth's sister planet because of its similar mass, radius, and distance from the sun •. Venus differs substantially from Earth, however, in several important respects, including its slow retro grade rotation, its massive atmosphere and high.surface temperature, its apparent deficiency in water, its weak magnetic field and its lack of a satel lite. The all-enveloping, continuous cloud cover on Venus has prevented optical imaging of the surface from spacecraft and has both slowed our under standing of its surface processes and lent an air of mystery to the planet.

Several of the bulk properties of Venus are known from Earth-based and spacecraft measurements, including the planetary mass (4.87 x Io24 kg), equatorial radius (6052 km) and mean density (5.25 g/cm3). Venus rotates in a retrograde direction opposite that of the planet's motion around the sun.· Venus rotates slower than any other planet in the solar system, turning one revolution every 243.1 Earth days. This slow rotation is consistent with the negligible difference found between the equatorial and polar diameters. The bulk density reduced to zero pressure is only about two percent less than that for the Earth, from which it has been inferred that Venus and Earth are broadly similar in chemical composition.

There are several indirect lines of evidence which suggest that Venus may have undergone internal planetary differentiation roughly similar to that of the Earth. Its massive atmosphere is presumably the product of mantle out gassing. The 1.5-km offset of the equatorial center of topographic figure from the center of mass of Venus is most plausibly explained by a low-density crust of variable thickness. Finally, the high abundances of uranium, thorium and potassium (comparable to values found in terrestrial crustal rocks) suggest that radioactive heat sources have been concentrated in a differentiated crust.

The processes shaping the surface of Venus, including tectonics, impact cratering and erosion, can be inferred from existing Earth-based radar surface imaging and altimetry, optical images of the Venera-9 and -10 landing sites, Pioneer Venus Radar Mapper images, and Venera 15 and 16 radar images. The surface is quite variable in its roughness at radar wavelengths. The Pioneer Venus Orbiter (PVO) also found Venus to be relatively flat with 60% of its surface falling within a height interval of one kilometer.

3-1

~ \ 630-1

Several large features of geological importance have been identified by the PVO. These include: (1) several circular depressions having a size dis tribution suggesting that they are impact craters; (2) a narrow 1000 km-long canyon-like feature, reminiscent of terrestrial and Martian rift valleys; and (3) an elevated feature, named Maxwell Montes, rising 11 km above the sur rounding plain that has been likened to a large shield volcano comparable in scale to Olympus Mons on Mars.

Venera 15 and 16 images of the northern hemisphere region have confirmed the existence of impact and volcanic features. Linear mountain ranges bounding Ishtar terra, first seen in Arecibo radar images, are seen to be complex series of folds and faults.

2. Major Unanswered Questions

If we are to understand the reasons for the very different evolution of two apparently similar planets like Venus and Earth, we must first answer some major questions about Venus which remain after the successful Pioneer Venus mission. These questions are:

(2) Interior

(1) What is the bulk composition of Venus, how does it differ from that of Earth, and how is the planet differentiated?

(2) What are the structure and dynamic state of the interior of Venus and how are they affected by its composition, mass, rotation rate, distance from the sun, and lack of satellites?

(3) How do these same factors affect the formation and struc ture of a planetary magnetic field?

(4) How has the interior evolved in composition, structure, and dynamic state?

(b) Surface

(1) What are the composition and structure of the lithosphere of Venus?

(2) What is the style of the surface geology and how does it depend on internal processes (tectonics), external pro cesses (impacts), and atmospheric processes (chemical, fluvial and eolian erosion)?

(3) How has the surface of Venus evolved in composition, struc ture and dynamic state? What is the geologic history of the planet?

A major technical goal of the VRM Project is to obtain global radar imagery with resolutions sufficient to address these and other fundamental questions regarding the origin, evolution, and present state of Venus. This

3-2 630""1 will provide the basis for subsequent, more detailed investigations of the surface and interior.

B. PROJECT OBJECTIVES

The Venus Radar Mapper (VRM) Project objectives are to place a satellite with a radar system in orbit around Venus, to obtain scientific data about Venus, to reduce and analyze these data and to .make the results available to the public and scientific communiry.·

C. SCIENCE OBJECTIVES

The science objectives of the Venus Radar Mapper mission are:

(1) To improve the knowledge of the surface tectonics and geologic history of Venus by analyzing the surface morphology and the pro cesses that control it.

(2) To improve the knowledge of the geophysics of Venus, principally its density distribution and dynamics.

(3) To improve the knowledge of the small scale surface physics.

D. INVESTIGATION OBJECTIVES

The objectives of the science experiments are:

(1) Imaging. To produce contiguous Synthetic Aperture Radar images of greater than 70% (with a goal of 90%) of the planet Venus with no systematic gaps except for one pole and with a surface radar resolution of at least 500 m (image resolution of 1 km or better).

(2) Altimetry. To produce maps of the topographic and radar scattering characteristics of the planet Venus.

(3) Gravity. To refine the low-degree and low-order gravity field of Venus and to produce high-resolution gravity maps wherever possible.

3-3 SECTION IV

SUMMARY OF TECHNICAL PLAN

A. VENUS RADAR MAPl'cR HISSION

1. Hission Phases

The following mission phases are defined:

(1) Prelaunch Phase. The prelaunch phase extends from delivery of the spacecraft to ~SC until the start of the launch countdown.

l~) Launch Phase. The launch phase extends from the start of launch countdown until completion of injection into an Earth Venus trajectory.

lJ) Cruise Phase. The cruise phase extends from inJection into an Earth-Venus trajectory until Venus orbit insertion minus 10 days.

(4) Venus Orbit Insertion Phase. The Venus orbit insertion phase extends from Venus orbit insertion minus 10 days until burnout of the solid rocket injection motor.

Orbit Trim and Checkout Phase. The orbit trim and checkout phase extends from burnout of the solid rocket injection motor until beginning of the science acquisition phase (approximately 8 days).

lb) Science Acquisition Phase. The science acquisition phase extends from completion of the orbit trim and checkout pnase until completion of one cycle of mapping (approximately 243 days).

(f) Extended Mission Phase. In the event of an extended mission, this phase extends from completion of the science acquisition phase until completion of the extended mission science.

li3) Science Data Analysis Phase. The science data analysis phase extends irom the end of the nominal science acquisition phase until release of science data by the Science Team at the end of the Project (six months after end of the nominal mission).

L, Mission Description

A single VRJ.vl spacecraft is to be launched from Kennedy Space Center during the ~0-day lau~ch period in April 1988. The launch vehicle is a Shuttle Orbiter-Centaur G combination. Once in Shuttle parking orbit, the Centaur G and VRM spacecraft combination is deployed from the cargo bay. After the appropriate orbit coast time, the Centaur G injects the VID1 spacecraft into an Earth-Venus transfer trajectory. The launch vehicle payload is 3600 kg, and the maximum injection energy (C3) required is 28 km 2/s2.

4-1 630-1

Tne Vfu'1 spacecraft is powered by single degree of freedom, sun-tracking, solar panels. The spacecraft is three-axis stabilized by reaction wheels using gyros and a star sensor for attitude reference. The spacecraft carries a solid rocKet motor for Venus orbit insertion. A small hydrazine system provides for traJectory correction and certain attitude control functions. Earth communication with the DSN is by means of S-and X-band channels, operating via low- and medium~gain antennas and a 3.7-m high gain antenna dish which is rigidly attached to the spacecraft. The high-gain antenna also functions as the SAK mapping antenna during orbital operations.

The interplanetary cruise phase lasts slightly less than four months and the VID1 spacecraft arrives at Venus in late July 1988. During the cruise phase there are several small trajectory correction maneuvers to insure proper approach geometry.. By firing the solid rocket motor slightly before Venus closest approach, it is possible to obtain the desired periapsis latitude of l0°N. At burnout, the spacecraft is in an elliptical orbit around Venus with periapsis altitude of 300 km, apoapsis altitude of 7762 km, and period of 3. 1 hours. (These are typical values of orbital parameters within the domain being studied.)

After orbit insertion the spacecraft is tracked from Earth and small trim maneuvers are commanded, if necessary. The radar system is checked out and readied for operation. On completion of these activities (about 8 days), the science acquisition phase begins.

The science acquisition phase lasts 243 days, which is the time required for Venus to make one rotation under the spacecraft orbit. Typical activities ~ during a single mapping pass are as follows. As the spacecraft moves away from ) apoapsis and nears the planet surface, the spacecraft is oriented so the high- gain an~enna points slightly to the side of the ground track. At a true anomaly of -Y:P, ·ctle radar is commanded on. The radar continues to take data to a true anomaly of ts0° and then the radar is commanded off. On the next pass ttte S\.Jath starts at -80° and goes to S~JO. Alternating north and south swatlts are repeated.

The range of latitude covered by the radar is 67°S to 90~. The range of look angles for the SAR is 13° to 44° from nadir. The SAR data are taken at a data rate of 750 kb/s and are stored in the spacecraft tape recorder. Altimeter and radiometer data are also taken whenever the radar is operating. The altimeter data are taken using the small fan beam antenna and a data rate of 30 kb/s.

As the spacecraft moves away from the planet toward apoapsis, the space craft reorients the high-gain antenna towards Earth and the stored radar data is transrnitted to Deep Space Network (DSN) stations on Earth. This data takin~- and-transmitting cycle is repeated every orbit revolution. After 243 days the planet is completely mapped except for the area near the south pole.

On Earth, the SA~, altimeter and radiometer data are processed into images and maps for scientific study. During the science acquisition phase, the spacecraft is tracked by the DSN and data are obtained for the gravity experiment. These data are processed to determine the Venus gravity field.

4-l 630~1

Mission Domain

The 20 contiguous launch dates that satisfy mission design criteria are shown in Figure 4-1. This mission domain assumes a fully loaded STAR 48 insertion motor and a relocated periapsis from the natural latitude to 10~. A nominal mapping orbit period of 3.1 hours is selected.

The spacecraft will be injected into a Type I interplanetary trajectory requiring slightly less than four months of flight time. A sample Earth-Venus ~ype I interplanetary transfer trajectory is shown in Figure 4-2.

During cruise, as many as three trajectory correction maneuvers (TCMs) are under consideration. 'l.'he first TCM, occurring approximately 10 days after spacecraft injection, corrects for the launch injection errors and is estimated to De approximately 26 m/s (~Vgy). The second TCM, occurring approximately one mouth later, corrects for the execution errors from TCM 1 and is based upon improved oroit determination delivery errors. The magnitude of this maneuver is approximately L m/s \~V~y). The final TCM, occurring at Venus Orbit Insertion lVOI) minus 10 days, corrects for the execution errors from TCM 2, is based upon improved orbit determination delivery errors, and targets the space craft to the proper Venus orbit insertion point. The magnitude of this maneuver is approximately 6 m/s (~Vyg).

Throughout the cruise phase, two-way coherent S-hand Doppler measurements are required by the navigation team. There are no requirements for science data gathering during cruise.

4. Approach Trajectory

Venus orbit insertion occurs in late July of 198~. A maneuver of Z777 m/s will be provided by the STAR 48 insertion motor and the liquid mono propellant system to achieve an elliptical orbit with a period of 3.1 to 3.7 hours and a periapsis altitude of 300 km. The approach trajectory will be targeted towards the Venus soutn pole (defined towards the south ecliptic pole) with an inclination of H5 degrees. The insertion burn will be performed slightly before the closest approach so as to rotate the periapsis of the capture oroit from its natural south location to 10° north of the equator. This mapping orbit vill then allow the mapping of the north pole and good coverage of the Ishtar region. Figure 4-3 shows an example of the Venus orbit insertion geometry as viewed from Earth.

~. Mapping Orbit

·rhe nominal mapping orbit parameters are given in Table 4-1, and other orbit-related parameters are given in Table 4-2. The nominal orbital period is uictated by the ~V capability of the insertion motor. The inclination and the periapsis location are dictated by the requirement of the side-looKing SAR to map the north pole and the Ishtar region. The longitude of the ascending node is a function of the launch/arrival dates.

Insertion orbit trims and radar system testing and calibration will last for 6 days. Radar mapping of Venus at a recording rate of 750 kb/s will commence immediately after the testing and calibration phase and will last until superior conjunction (5 April 1989) minus 2 days for a total of about 243

4-3 630--1

00 08/15 CX) ~ u.J I- ~ 08/05 -'

07/06 LL.l...... L__L__LL.L..L__L__LL...Li__L__LL..l...... l_L_L.L...!:::fi~,1LL__L_J~~.....L.~:-!::-::L_J_~ 03/09 03/19 03/29 04/08 04118 LAUNCH DATE - (1988)

Figure 4-l. Mission Domain - 975 kg S/C Dry Mass

-r

EARTH AT INJECTION

10.DAY TIME TICKS

Figure 4-2. Sample Type I Interplanetary Trajectory

4-4 ,...j "-----

-suN -T

· APOAPSIS DIRECTION-._ ~~~~~~~~~

INCOMING HYPERBOLIC TRAJECTORY

3~MIN TIME TICKS

Figure 4-3. Venus Orbit Insertion Geometry (View from Earth)

Table ~-1. Mapping Orbit Parameters

Semimajor Axis, a 10082 km Eccentricity, e 0.3700 Inclination, i 85.0 deg Argument of Perapsis, r'' 10.0 deg Ascending Node, 0. 51.8 deg Time of Periapsis, Tp

All angles refer to Venus equator and equinox.

Table 4-2. Other Orbit-Related Parameters

Period 186.0 m 3.1 hr Orbital Speed at Periapsis 8.370 km/s Sidereal Rotation Period 243 days Rate of Rotation -1.4815 deg/day -0.1914 deg/orbit Shift in Ground Track at Equator 20.21 km/orbit Periapsis Latitude 10.0 deg Periapsis Longitude at Arrival 234.6 deg Periapsis Altitude 300 km

4-5 630~1

days. An extended mission will be possible once communication is reestablished after superior conjunction.

Throughout the orbital phase of the mission, two-way and three-\vay coherent S-band doppler measurements will be required by the navigation team. The navigation team will also use a powerful radio data type called N~VLBI (narrow-band differential very long baseline interferometry). During the mapping phase, small orbit sustenance maneuvers may be performed by the mono propellant liquid system which will also be used to unload the momentum wheels.

Figure 4-4 gives a heliocentric view of the mapping orbit geometry from the north ecliptic pole. Figure 4-5 provides a summary of the mission timeline. Table 4-3 gives the delta-V budget for the mission.

6. SAR Coverage

The VRM Mission will potentially cover about 91% of the planet's surface in a period of 243 days. This coverage will span from -67° to 90° latitude (north pole). The SAR look angle is varied along the orbit to provide a constant SAR swath width of 25 km. There is a minimum of 3 km overlap at some point in each swath every orbit.

The SAR data acquisition strategy is dictated by the fact that the high gain antenna serves both as the SAR antenna and data downlink. Consequently, Rfter the mapping is completed in each orbit, the spacecraft reorients to point towards Earth for the data downlink. Therefore, there is a time allocation rluring each orbit for spacecraft reorientation before and after mapping (6 min each), a star calibration turn (20 min), mapping (35.5 min), and tape recorder playback (111.5 min). There is a period of about 40 days during the mapping phase vJhen apoapsis is at maximum occultation and the coverage strategy is adjusted to minimize the loss of SAR coverage.

7. Orbit Determination Strategy

The orbit determination (OD) strategy occurs in three phases. The first phase is the near-Earth OD immediately following trans-Venus injection and uses angle data and conventional two-way doppler tracking from the Deep Space Network (DSN). No angle data will be used after injection plus five days.

The second phase is the interplanetary cruise OD and uses arcs of conventional two-way Doppler obtained by the DSN. The OD strategy used during these first two phases is essentially the same as that used for the Pioneer Venus Missions in 1978.

The third and final phase of the OD strategy is the Venus orbit phase which is a major departure from previous OD strategies.

The OD strategy for the Venus orbit phase is divided into an orbit trim and checkout phase which extends from Venus Orbit Insertion (VOl) to VOl plus eight days, and the science acquisition phase which extends from VOl plus eight days to the nominal end of mission. During the orbit trim and checkout phase, multiple-orbit fits will use two-way and three-way Doppler data and N~VLBI to determine the orbit and check the data generation process.

4-6 VOl + 150d

VOl + 60d VOl + 240d ~ PERl APSIS-. EARTH AT LAUNCH VOl LAUNCH 880406 d VOl + 210d VOl 880726 VOl + 180 VOl + 240d 890323 SUPERIOR 890405 CONJUNCTION ~ SOLAR OCCULTATION - EARTH OCCULTATION Fig. 4-4. Mapping Orbit Geometry (View From North Ecliptic Pole)

PLAYBACK

TURN ALTERNATING NOT OCCULTED STAR CAL

OCCULTATION

PLAYBACK

TURN · DURING EARTH OCCULTATION STAR CAL

OCCULTATION 186

MINUT£S Figure 4-5. Mission Timeline

4-7 630.,1

Table 4-3. Delta-V Budget

Interplanetary Trajectory Correction< 1 ) 45 m/s Venus Orbit I)sertion< 2 ) 2777 m/ s Orbit Tr)ms (1 20 m/s Margin(l 40 m/s

TOTAL 2882 m/s

(1) Liquid Mono-Propellant System (2) Star 48 Solid Rocket Motor Plus Net Thrust Vector Control ~V

Multiple-orbit fits of two-way and three-way Doppler and N~VLBI data will also be used during the science acquisition phase. These multiple-orbit fits will include three-way data from a minimum of two baselines (from Goldstone-Australia and Goldstone-Madrid).

B. SYSTEMS

1. Science and Mission Design System

The Science and Mission Design System (SMDS) consists of the organizational teams and supporting equipment (such as computers, plotters, etc.) required to translate science objectives into science and mission requirements, to develop the science implementation, and to develop the mission design, including navigation design, which is responsive to the requirements. This system is responsible for developing the science implementation plan, the mission plan, the navigation plan, and the end-to-enrl Lnformation system plan. Other major deliverables are the Science Requirements Document, the Mission Requirements Document, the Project (Science) Data Management Plan, the Science Management Plan, and several mission design documents.

a_. VRM Science Investigations

The Announcement of Opportunity for a Venus Orbiting Imaging Radar (VOIR) mission was issued by NASA on 12 October 1978. A Proposal Information Package was mailed upon receipt of a Letter of Intent to propose. The proposals were reviewed in accordance with the NASA procedures for the acquisition of investigations that were in effect at that time. The conditional selection of the combined Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) and altimetry investigation was announced 1 August 1979. Certain non-imaging science investigations were then conditionally selected and announced in July 1980. However, with the exception of the gravity experiment, the non-imaging investigations were not confirmed when the project was redefined with limited objectives. The science investigations have been confirmed for the VID1 Project and details are provided in Table 4-4.

4-8

~I Table 4-4. VRM Science Investigations

Principal Investigator Experiment and Institution Experiment Objectives

RADAR Gordon H. Pettengill - Imaging Massachusetts Institute Produce contiguous images of of Technology at least 70% (with a goal of 90%) of the planet Venus with no systematic gores except for one pole and with a surface radar resolution of at least 500 m (image resolution of 1 km or better).

Altimetry Produce a global topogr-aphic map of the planet Venus with a range resolution commensurate with the SAR range resolution.

GRAVITY Michel Lefebvre Determine the low order har Centre National d'Etudes monics coefficients of the Spatiales/Group gravity field of Venus de Recherches de Geodesie Spatiale

William L. Sjogren California Institute of Technology/Jet Propulsion Laboratory

b. SMDS Organization

The SMDS is responsible for mission design, navigation development, and science management as shown in Figure 4-6. Mission design is accomplished through the Mission Design Team under the Mission Design Manager. Navigation development is accomplished through the Navigation Development Team under the Navigation Development Manager. Science management is accomplished by the Science Manager with assistance from the Project Scientist and Principal Investigators.

4-9 SCIENCE AND PROJECT MISSION DESIGN 'SCIENTIST

S. S. DALLAS, MGR.* R. S. SAUNDERS, SCI. I I I I I NAVIGATION MISSION DESIGN SCIENCE DEVELOPMENT

~ E. CUTTING, MGR. S. MOHAN, MGR. M. KOBRICK, MGR...... I 0 • MISSION REQUIREMENTS • NAVIGATION • SCIENCE REQUIREMENTS • MISSION PLAN • NAVIGATION PLAN • EXPERIMENT PLANS • LAUNCH CONSTRAINTS ANALYSIS • ORBIT DETERMINATION • SCIENCE MANAGEMENT PLAN STUDIES • TRAJECTORY DESIGN • DATA MANAGEMENT PLAN • MANEUVER ANALYSIS • COVERAGE ANALYSIS • RADAR DATA PRODUCTS PLAN • PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS • SCIENCE TEAM SUPPORT • INFORMATION SYSTEM DESIGN • GUEST INVESTIGATOR SUPPORT • ENVIRONMENTAL MODELING *CHAIRMAN OF THE PROJECT DESIGN TEAM

Figure 4-6. VRM SMDS Organization 630""1

~: 1) Mission Design Team Charter. The VRM Mission Design \ Team (MDT) consists of those VRM engineers who are involved in the design of the VRM mission. Mission is defined to be the utilization ~f the Project systems (consistent with physical constraints, performance limitations and available resources) to meet Project objectives. The MDT meets on a regular basis in order to plan, coordinate and review the mission design work. The members of the MDT are technical specialists in orbits, sequence design, information systems and system design of the various Project systems. The MDT assists in publishing the Mission Requirements Document (630-7), Mission Plan .(630-50), Navigation Plan (630-51), etc. The MDT is most active in the early phases of the Project.

2) Navigation Development Team Charter. The VRM Navigation Development Team consists of engineers involved in Orbit Determination Analysis and Maneuver Analysis in support of the overall VRM Navigation function. The function consists of:

(a) Processing radiometric data generated by the DSN tracking systems to determine the position and velocity of the VRM spacecraft,

(b) Predicting the flight path of the VRM spacecraft,

(d) Analyzing the insertion of the VRM spacecraft into orbit about Venus,

(e) Trimming the VRM orbit to achieve the desired orbit parameters,

(f) Performing the orbit determination from VOl to EOM in support of the VRM mission objectives,

(g) Processing requests for and providing navigational information to the Data Products Working Group,

(h) Providing navigational prediction information to the DSN,

(i) Designing and implementing new orbit determination data types for oper'ational use.

The VRM Navigation Development Team members participate in Mission Design activities, and interface with the major Project systems groups. This team meets biweekly and works closely with the Mission Design Team which also meets biweekly (alternate weeks). The Navigation Development Team is responsible for the Navigation Plan Document (630-51). The team reports to the Science and Mission Design manager during the mission design phase, and reports on R quarterly basis to the Project Science Group and to the Data Products Working Group.

The Navigation Development Team forms the nucleus of the MOS Navigation Team. Implementation of the design derived by the Navigation Development Team will be accomplished under the auspices of the MOS organization. Navigation

4-11 630=1 ~~ .' ·•·. personnel will work in close association with the Gravity Team through all [·tlases of the mission to share information pertaining to the Venus gravity model.

2. Spacecraft System

a. Configuration Description

The Spacecraft Flight System (SFS) compr ises• the Spacecraft (S/C), tt1e Kadar System flight equipment and the SFS-Centaur adapter. Figure 4-7 stlows an outboard profile of the launch configuration. Five major elements are shown: ll) the SFS-Centaur adapter, (2) the Solid Rocket Motor (SRM) module, ( 3) the Voyager Hus, ( 4) the Forward Equipment Module (FEM) and, ( 5) the Voyager rligh Gain Antenna (HGA). Appendages shown in the figure include the 1\oc«et t:ngine l'lodules (REM), the Solar Panels, the Radar System Altimeter Antenna (ALTA), the Star Scanner, and the Medium Gain Antenna (MGA).

The vehicle in this configuration has a mass of just over 3500 kg and is approximately 20 ft (6 m) from the Centaur interface to the HGA feed. ThG maximum diameter is 14 ft (4,3 m) from REM to REM allowing a comfortable ciynamic envelope margin. The 9-ft (L., 7-m) diameter interface with the Centaur is the only structural interface with the launch system. When in the shuttle oay, the solar panels are facing the payload bay wall with the MGA pointing 0ut of the bay. Physical separation from the Centaur releases the solar panel from the launch latches, permitting spring deployment to the cruise configuration displayed in Figure 4-8.

The cruise configuration as shown is oriented with the -Z axis (SRM) facing the sun and the X axis (solar panel axis) perpendicular to the ecliptic. Each solar panel has a single degree of freedom actuator providing rotation 2 around the X axis. The total array substrate area is approximately 10,2 m • The MGA is fixed to the -X solar panel and maintains Earth pointing by slightly otf pointing that panel from the sun.

After Venus Orbit Insertion (VOl), which is accomplished using the SRM, the SKM module is separated, achieving the mapping configuration shown in Figure 4-~. Shown in this figure are the monopropellant tank located in the center opening of the Voyager Bus, and the location of one of two command Low Gain Antennas (LGA); the other i.s located on the opposite side of the HGA.

Electronic packaging in the Bus is the Voyager/Galileo concept with louvers provided for temperature control. A Nitrogen tank is located within the Voyager Hus and is used to repressurize the propellant tank for VOl.

The Forward Equipment Module contains the Radar System sensor as well as other Spacecraft subsystem components. This module also incorporates louvers in selected areas for temperature control.

4-12 c

CENTAUR ADAPTE?..

0 •Z--

STAR SCANNER SOLAR PAN'ELS

Figure 4-7. SFS Launch Configuration

4-13 1 6 3 0"" 1

MGA SOLAR PAKt:L

SOLAR PANEL ACTVATOR

SR!-1

Figure 4-8. SFS Cruise Configuration

4-14

~r, I +Z

FUEL T~~K

.._1----- SOLAR P A.'\EL

Figure 4-9. SFS Mapping Configuration

4-15 630col

Functional Description b. :~ A functional block diagram of the SFS is presented in Figure 4-1U. Primary sequencing control is provided by a m~dified (hardware and soft ware) Galileo Command and Data System. Two 0.9 x 10 bit tape recorders are provided to store Radar System (RS) high-rate data for subsequent transmission to the Deep Space Network, and SFS engineering data when direct communications are not available.

Celestial and inertial sensors in the Attitude and Articulat~on Control Subsystem (AACS) provide control references. Attitude control torques are provided by reaction wheels for all phases of the mission except when attached to the Centaur and during separation and propulsive (delta velocity) maneuvers when monopropellant engines supply the required control torques. Modified Galileo electronics and software are used for computational and sequencing functions within the AACS. Articulation on the SFS is limited to the single degree of freedom of the solar panels.

SFS telecommunications capabilities include both S- and X-band uplink and downlink systems. Table 4-5 summarizes the data links included in the design. The' tiGA is shared between the telecommunications and the Synthetic Aperture Kadar (SAK). During Venus mapping the HGA is dedicated to the SAR; at other times it is used to transmit stored RS high rate data and SFS engineering data and receive ground commands in accordance with the mission sequence. The X-uand uplink, which is available only through the HGA, is provided to support the Venus Gravity investigation. The Medium Gain Antenna is used for S-band uplink and downlink during cruise and emergencies in Venus orbit. Two Low Gain Antennas provide omnidirectional command coverage for emergency operations.

Primary electrical power for the SFS is generated by two solar panels after separation from the Centaur. Prior to separation, power is supplied by the Centaur/STS. Two NiCd batteries supply transient and off sun-power. The Electrical Power Subsystem provides 28 VDC and 2.4 kHz AC power to the S/C subsystems and the KS. Modified Galileo hardware provides pyrotechnic firing circuitry and power load switching as well as the DC to AC conversion.

The Venus Orbit Insertion delta velocity is accomplished by a fully loaded STAR 48 solid rocket motor. A pressure fed (GN2) monopropellant system provides all other delta velocity requirements as well as attitude control torques during all engine burns.

c. Flight Sequence

During the STS boost phase the SFS will be powered down to only essential safety and maintenance items. These include maintaining a command receptive posture (both hardline and RF), required safety monitors, "keep alive" voltage to the AACS memories and thermal control heaters enabled. All electrical power during this phase and up until just prior to separation from the Centaur will be provided by the Centaur. No SFS commands or sequenc ing is required; however, 1.2 kb/s engineering telemetry data will be routed to the Centaur for relay to the STS and then to JPL.

4-16 0 0 0

POWER SHUNT REG STRUCTURE & I TEMPERATURE CONTROL (2) RADIATOR MECHA~ISMS I 28 Vdc STS & GSE

POWER I SOLAR ARRAY (2) DIST. STRUCTURE PAINT UNIT I

SRM MODULE II 1-r-+-~ SEPARATION I LOUVERS I

~~ARATION I I HEATERS I ' r-TELECOMMUNIC~ONS------AC coos------1 LGA (2) .p.' ,_.I S/C S/C CMOS...... S/S

TORS ATTITUDE & ARTICULATION CONTROL ---,-- - PROPULSION- AACS REACTION I ELECTRONICS WHEEL (3) I I I RADAR SYSTEM I 12-0. 2 4 - 5 4 - 40 I 4-100

Figure 4-10. SFS Functional Block Diagram 630""1

1able 4-5. Telecommunications Link Summary

Antennas Data Link DSN S/C Uata Rate Mode Content

Downlink

Cruise 64 m HGA 268.8 kb/s X-Band Recorded Engineering

34 m MGA 40 b/s S-Band Real-Time Engineering

Orbit 64 m HGA 268.8 kb/s X-Band Recorded Radar and Engineering

64 m HGA 1.20 kb/s S-Band Real-Time Engineering

64 m HGA 40 b/s S-Band Emergency Engineering

34 m HGA 115.2 kb/s X-Band Recorded Radar and Engineering r) Uplink

Cruise 34 m MGA 31.25 b/s S-Band Hission Commands

64 m LGA 7.8 b/s S-Band Emergency Commands

Orbit 64 m HGA 31.25 b/s S-Band Mission Commands

64 m LGA 7.8 b/s S-Band Emergency Commands

34 m HGA 31.25 b/s X-Band Gravity Investi- gat ion

4-18

I I l 630-1

After the STS Orbiter payload doors have been opened, an in-bay checkout of the SFS will be initiated. The checkout sequence will be initiated by a Centaur discrete with the actual sequence controlled by the S/C Command and Data Subsystem (CDS). No RF transmissions nor deployments are planned. SFS telemetry data will continue as during the STS boost phase for evaluation by the MOS. Following the checkout, the SFS will be powered down for the Centaur boost phase.

Contingency capabilities during the in-bay operations include RF command reception, a digital hardline command from the Orbiter, and telemetry reprogramming.

~he status of tne SFS during the Centaur boost phase is the same as during the srs boost phase. Approximately one hour prior to separation from the Centaur, the SFS will be activated and prepared for separation. Initiation of this phase will be by redundant Centaur discretes starting a separation sequence in the SFS CDS. Other redundant discretes will release SFS RF transmission and pyrotechnic firing safety interlocks. The AACS will be powered and propellant lines opened to the 0.9 N thruster and the 17b N engine valves. Shortly before separation, transfer to internal SFS power will be commanded and the S-band transmitter turned on, transmitting SFS engineering data at 40 b/s over the MGA. ·

A final set of redundant Centaur discretes will result in the SFS initializing the AACS reference calculations and firing the pyrotechnics to separate from the Centaur. Separation force is provided by springs. Physical separation releases the solar panel launch latches, allowing the spring driven deployment mechanisms to deploy the array.

After an appropriate delay assuring adequate clearance between the Centaur and the SFS, the AACS is enabled to damp tipoff rates using the 0.~ N thrusters and orient for cruise. Normal cruise attitude for the SFS is with the SR}1 pointed toward the sun and the solar panel axis perpendicular to the ecliptic plane.

Planned cruise operations include daily star updates/gyro-calibrations, S-band telemetry downlink, and uplink tracking passes. Uplink commands are planned weekly, and three Trajectory Correction Maneuvers are planned prior to Vul. All attitude control during nonpropulsive periods, including attitude maneuvers, will be by reaction wheels. The 0.~ N thrusters will be used to control wheel momentum ouildup. While these are the planned events, the SFS system is constrained only by power, temperature and propellant consumption in performing any designed-in function. Functions which might be considered include l:iGA pointing calibration, X-band up and downlink tests and liquid propulsion system calibration burns as examples.

Four Kbytes of CUS memory are allocated to store critical SFS engineering parameters. This function is planned to operate continuously, providing SFS performance evaluation during maneuver and, equally important, a history of events before and immediately following a malfunction that results in loss o[ real time data for a period of time.

TCMs are planned using the four 178 N engines in a pulse-off mode for X and Y-axis attitude control, and using the 0.9 N thruster for roll control.

4-19 630""1 ..

lhe solar panels will be positioned in the x-z plane during the thrusting maneuver to 11linimize dynamic motion. TCM data will be recorded on a tape recorder for subsequent playback enabling maneuver reconstruction by the Hission Operations System (MOS). Playback of recorded engineering data will require use of the X-band HGA and an earth-pointing maneuver. The above discussion is the normal mode of operation; all liquid engines and thrusters may oe used in any combination for the maneuvers as determined by the HOS.

Venus Orbit Insertion (VOl) uses the SRM for the required velocity increment. Attitude control during the SRM burn will use the 178 N and the 445 N liquid engines in a pulse on mode for pitch and yaw and the 22 N engines for roll control! Pyre valves will be activated to open the lines to these engines just prior to VOI.

Following VOl the SRM module will be separated and the SFS oriented with the HGA pointed to Earth and the solar panel axis perpendicular to the ecliptic plane. All data, both uplink and down link, will be through the HGA from this time forward. SFS real time engineering data will be transmitted at 1.2 kb/s 11n the S-band link and all data from the tape recorder will be transmitted at 2ud.8 kb/s on the X-band link (115.2 kb/s is also provided). Data on the tape recorder will include RS high rate data and engineering data or engineering data alone. Uplink will normally be S-hand except when the gravity investiga tion is being supported by the X-band uplink. As during cru{se, all n6npropul sive attitude control and attitude maneuvers will be accomplished by reaction \vheels.

Following VOl, eight days have been planned for trimming the orbit and system calibration. Functionally the Orbit Trim Maneuvers (OTHs) will be identical to the TCMs conducted during cruise. Two OTMs are planned, one to adjust the period and one to adjust the periapsis altitude. The S/C has the capability to perform numerous O'l'Ms limited only by propellant consumption. Special calibrations are anticipated only for HGA pointing and RS calibration. Star updates and gyro calibration will be performed as a normal operation each orbit as discussed below. "Calibration" of other S/C subsystems will be by Jata analyses during other operations and will not require special sequences.

The mapping mission is planned to be a rigid orbital cyclic, i.e. each orbit will be sequentially identical with only times and turn sets varying as dictated by Earth-Venus-Sun geometry and orbit variations. Uplinks are planned three times a week to adjust parameters dependent on these variables and detailed RS parameters.

The basic cycle consists of a 35.5 minute mapping pass, a 6 minute maneuver to Earth point, a data playback period, a 20 minute star update/gyro calibration period at apoapsis, a data playback period and a 6 minute maneuver back to the initial mapping attitude.

During the entire orbit the solar array will be articulated to provide as much energy as possible within the orientation constraints of mapping and other maneuvers. During the playback periods, the solar array axis is perpendicular to the ecliptic. Uplink commands may be scheduled any time during the playback periods (HGA pointed to Earth). The S/C has the capability to store a four day command load. Commands may be scheduled either S-band or X-band; however, the X.-S ummconverter must be powered to accept X-band uplinks.

4-20

II~ 630~1

d. Spacecraft Flight System Mass Properties

The baseline Spacecraft Flight SysteQ mass allocations are summarized in Table 4-6. The on-orbit dry mass allocation of 975 kg includes design uncertainties consistent with the design maturity, a spacecraft reserve of 45 kg, and a Project Manager reserve of 45 kg. The SRM module and Centaur adapter mass estimates including their respective design uncertainty allow ances. The injected mass estimate of 3538 kg is 63 kg below the defined Centaur limit of 3600 kg.

The calculated injected SFS center of mass is 1.9 meters forward of the Centaur interface. The radial center of mass will be established on the centerline +0.4 em for the SRM burn using ballast as required, thus assuring tttat the radial center of mass on the launch vehicle will be no further than 1.0 em from the Centaur centerline.

3. Radar System

The radar system comprises the radar flight equipment, radar support equipment, and the radar data processing subsystem (RDPS). The radar flight equipment comprises the sensor subsystem and the altimeter antenna subsystem (ALTA), and is provided by Hughes Aircraft Company. The telecom/radar high-gain antenna is part of the SFS and is shared between the radar and spacecraft telecommunications subsystem.

The sensor subsystem consists of the electronics that generate, transmit, ,-., and rece.ive the synthetic aperture radar (SAR) and altimeter signals. The \___- I sensor subsystem also accepts commands from the spacecraft and provides the radar data stream and the radar engineering telemetry to the spacecraft. One developmental model sensor (non-redundant) will be developed to evaluate the sensor design and for use in electrical interface tests with the Spacecraft Command Data System. One flight model sensor, with redundant units will be fabricated, tested and delivered for integration with the Spacecraft. In addition, a sensor thermal/mass model will be fabricated and delivered to the Spacecraft for use in spacecraft modal tests. Sensor spares will be carried at the component level.

the ALTA consists of the antenna. Transmission lines connecting the ALTA to the sensor subsystem and the structure required to attach the ALTA to the spacecraft are part of the spacecraft. One flight model ALTA will be fabricated, tested and delivered to the Spacecraft. ALTA spares will be carried at the material level.

The support equipment will consist of bench checkout equipment (BCE) used for testing sensor units (for example, the transmitter) and the ALTA, system support equipment (SSE) used to perform subsystem-level sensor testing and spacecraft testing, and shipping/handling fixtures.

4-21 630-1

Table 4-6. VRM Flight Mass Allocation Summary

Mass Item Allocation, kg

On Orbit Science 164 Engineering Subsystems 76 6 Project Manager Reserve 45

Dry SFS Mass On Orbit (975)

Propellant Inerts 6 OTM Propellant 9 ACS Propellant 2 Reserve Propellant 28

Wet SFS Mass On Orbit (1020)

VOl Propellant 2033 SRM Stage (Jettison) 215 ~ SFS Mass Before VOl (3268) ~-

TCM & ACS Propellant 70 Centaur Adapter 200

lnjected Mass (3538)

The RDPS comprises the data handling and computing hardware and software necessary to convert SAR raw data into SAR data products, and to convert altimeter raw data into altimeter data products including radiometry data. Major elements of the RDPS are the processor input unit (provided by Hughes), the advanced digital SAR processor (ADSP) that is being developed by JPL under the sponsorship of the NASA Office of Aeronautics-and Space Technology, and the Multimission Image Processing Laboratory (MIPL) being developed by JPL under the sponsorship of the NASA Office of Space Science and Applications.

a. Sensor Subsystem

The sensor subsystem consists of flight electronics that generate an encoded high peak power S band pulse for input to the antenna subsystem. Echos from the planet are collected by the antenna and routed to

4-22 the sensor subsystem, which amplifies and converts the return signals to a digital data for ·transmission by the spacecraft to the DSN earth stations. Figure 4-11 provides a simplified functional block diagram of the sensor sub system and Table 4~7 provides design derivation from previous Hughes programs.

Table 4-7. Radar Sensor Design Derivation

Item DeriV!Ition Required Modific.tion

STALO GMS/GOES, PV Frequency, output level RF hybrids GMS/GOES DC isol•tion Clock/PRF logic GMS/GOES, PV Simil•r components, circuitry TIIC G•lileo, Metw, SSMI, PV Form•t Frequency multiplier GMS/GOES, W111ter Minor- change frequency S.O.nd hybrids GMS/GOES Minor - center frequency Bii)hae modul•tor IRIID Tak Flight peckllging Po-r monitors GMS/GOES, PV Adept to duty cycle Mlldium power amplifier JTIDS, SBS Center frequency, duty cycle High po-r amplifier JTIDS, SBS Centtr frequency, duty cycle Circul•tors Marisat, PV High pe•k power Filters •nd couplers M•risat None S.O.nd mech switch111 I ntelnt, Comst•r High pnk power PINS-bend switch111 Rol8nd Change connectors Low noise amplifier SBS, Anik, Palepa, W111tar Center frequency RF amplifier ·sss. Anik, West•r Modify frequency Frequency converters GMS/GOES, SBS, Anik None Video amplifiers Anik/SBS None A/D converters New New R•te buffers PV, SSMI Requirements Oat• formatting PV,SSMI Format Switching reaul•tors SSMI, PV, GMS/GOES Minor Unur regul•tors SSMI, GMS/GOES Minor RFI filters SSMI, GMS/GOES/PV Minor

The sensor subsystem implementation blends many electronic domains, including de power conversion, microwave pulsed power, low noise microwave amplification, RF and video amplification, analog-to-digital conversion, coding, and digital data f-ormatting. Many digital logic families are employed including emitter-coupled logic (ECL), Schottky, low-power Schottky, and complementary metal-oxide semiconductor (CMOS).

1) Sensor General Description. The sensor subsystem consists of the flight electronics, which mate with the spacecraft mounting structure to form a single mechanical assem~ly. Subsystem electrical inter faces with the spacecraft include power (two buses), command, telemetry, and the radar data stream. The interface with the antenna subsystem consists of ,...,, output TNC jacks that mate to the antenna cables. \.__ .' The sensor subsystem is partitioned into units. The unit functions are defined be low:

4-23 SAR TELEMETRY ANO _. TOSAR FROM ALL UNITS I TO ALL UNITS REDUNDANCY ! I AN TEN COMMAND t SWITCH NA t STALO 1 ~

~ RANGE OUTPUT I-' PRFITIMING t ~ TRANSMITTER t f...--- ,.... ,. DISPERSION t NETWOI:IK 1 r--- I I STALO 2 ALTIMETER SELECT ~ ~ f-.- SWITCH RANGE OUTPUT TRANSMITTER 2 ~ PRF/TIMING 2 ...... DISPERSION 2 NETWORK 2 I I

TO I TELEMETRY AND I ALTIMET FROM ALL UNITS I TO ALL UNITS ER I COMMAND2 ANTENN A RECEIVER SELECT TRANSFER SWITCH

BASEBAND DATA ~ RECEIVER 1 PROCESSOR 1 FORMATTER 1 ~ ~ ,. DATA TO SPACECRAFT

BASEBAND r-- DATA RECEIVER 2 ~ L....-t. PROCESSOR 2 FORMATTER 2

Figure 4-11. Radar Sensor Subsystem Block Diagram .J 630~1

Unit Function

PKF and Timing Generate stable timing and cloc~s (includes the STALO)

Range dispersion Generate coded S band signal for imaging and calibration

Transmitter Amplify signal for SAR, altimeter modes

Output network Connect transmitter/antenna/receiver; monitor forward power

Receiver Amplify low level echo; provide first downconversion and gain control

Baseband processor Provide in-phase and quadrature (I&Q) downconversion and digitization

Data formatter Create radar data stream

Telemetry and command Accept commands, time; process radar (T&C) telemetry

~ach of the tinits is separately testable; bench checkout equipment (BCE) is desi~ned and produced, test procedur~s generated, and tests and calibrations performed at this level. This partitioning strategy enhances the repairability of the sensor subsystem at all stages of the project, including spacecraft level testing.

Units may be packaged in one or more modules. Individual units are non redundant; thus, two units of each function are flown in the sensor subsystem. One unit can be removed from the sensor subsystem while testing continues using the remaining unit. An exception is the output network unit, which contains single antenna and receiver redundancy select switches. Subsystem test cannot proceed on a backup path if an output network module is removed.

The units are constructed using planar layouts mounted to metal surfaces. No element need be removed to provide access to another element. The elements enclosed within the modules consist of microwave integrated circuits (MICs), printed wiring boards (PWBs), power conversion magnetics, and coaxial structures. All items are fastened to the module ~entral web (or integral face), the internal support structures, or the module mounting surface. This design not only provides the excellent mechanical properties needed to withstand the dynamic loads but also assures good thermal conduction paths to the spacecraft thermal control surface and simplifies module repair.

2) Sensor Functional Description. The sensor subsystem blocK diagram is shown in Figure 4-11. To retain diagram l_egibility, engineer ing telemetry, power converters, clock distribution, and control lines are not r. shown. '-· .

4-25 630~1

The sensor subsystem has four modes: off, standby, receiver-only, and ~ mapping. In the off mode, the sensor is unpowered. When switched bus power ' ) is applied to the sensor subsystem from the spacecraft, a power on reset places the sensor subsystem in the standby mode. One command element (CE) in the Telemetry and Command Unit, is selected (by stored spacecraft or ground command) to be active, the other passive. On the basis of commands from the spacecraft, the active CE selects the stable local oscillator (STALO) and PKF/timing unit to be used. As soon as the STALO comes on, it synchronizes all power converters (PCs) and provides the necessary clocks for the engineering telemetry. The sensor subsystem is then in the standby mode. The receiver-only mode augments the standby mode by turning the receiver on. The mapping mode provides for SAR, altimeter, and radiometry data acquisition on the basis of commands from the spacecraft command data subsystem.

The STALO is the heart of the subsystem. It is the source of all clocks and timing pulses used by the subsystem and serves as the input to the frequency synthesizer that produces the S-hand carrier. The stability of the STALO is specified such that the entire system is coherent over a real aperture period. All clocks and timing signals are derived from the STALO by the PRF/timing unit and distributed to other units.

The STALO frequency is multiplied in the range dispersion unit, where a biphase code modulates the S-band carrier. The encoded S-band signal is gated into the transmitter unit, where it is amplified to a 325 watt peak power S hand pulse. The pulse is 22.1 ~sec long and consists of a 25-bit long code, each chip being 0.884 wsec. The chip time (bandwidth) determines the SAR range resolution.

There are two transmitter output ports, one for the altimeter antenna (ALTA), the other for the telecom/radar high gain antenna (HGA). During imaging, a circulator in the output network unit connects the transmitter output to the HGA during the high power transmit time and routes the target echo power captured by the HGA to the receiver unit. During the altimeter function, the output network unit similarly connects the transmitter altimeter port to the ALTA and directs the echo energy to the receiver unit.

the receiver unit, which has a high power switch to protect it from leakage during the transmit time, amplifies the S-band echo energy and down-converts it to IF where it is amplified further.

A second downconverter in the baseband processor unit generates I&Q signals, which are digitized after a DC restore level is added. The resultant digital words are rate buffered in the data formatter unit.

After combining the SAR imaging data with altimetry data, radar engineer ing data, time tags, and format headers, the data formatter unit provides the radar data stream, which is clocked across the spacecraft interface in two parallel streams at a burst rate of 403.2 kbps. This results in an effective average rate of 790.08 kbps.

Within the telemetry and command unit, spacecraft commands are distributed by the command element, and engineering data are digitized, buffered in source ~ packets, and sent to the data formatter unit and spacecraft by the telemetry ' ) element.

4-26

. 111 630""1

3) Sensor Kedundancy. Reliability is the most important subsystem implementation design consideration after performance. As shown in Figure 4-10, the sensor subsystem is completely redundant except for the BGA antenna redundancy switch, the altimeter select switch, and the receiver select transfer switch. The subsystem incorporates extensive cross-strapping between units to achieve maximal advantage of the redundancy and minimize the number of components affected by a failure.

Should a uhit malfunction or if trend analysis on the ground indicates a drift from desired unit performance, a command to the sensor subsystem deselects the unit in question and selects the redundant circuitry. The selection commands received by the sensor subsystem are executed immediately.

All circuitry used for RF cross-strapping are located within the units rather than between them. This facilitates repairability of the subsystem, as units may be replaced without regard to the location of the redundancy cross strap; both the redundant units are identical (with the exception of the output network modules which contain the nonredundant antenna select switches).

STALO redundancy receives special attention because this frequency source is the heart of the radar. Each of the two STALOs has a dedicated power converter and is cross-strapped using RF hybrids so that it works with either PRF/timing unit.

Ttle only mechanical switches in the sensor subsystem are the SAR antenna redundancy switch, altimeter select switch, and receiver select transfer switch. Because there is only one telecom/Radar antenna, one altimeter antenna, and two sources driving them, a low loss method must be found to accomplish redundancy control. Low loss is of prime importance because the losses are round-trip, affecting the transmitter power available at the antenna input and echo power from the surface. The mechanical switch has extremely low loss (U.1 dB) and never has to switch the S-band power; it is switched only during test and in the case of a transmitter failure. In each case the transmitter is off. The receiver select transfer switch also minimizes losses and is never activated unless a failure occurs.

4) Sensor Physical Characteristics. The sensor subsystem is contained within one housing with a maximum envelope of 135 x 100 x 28 em excluding electrical connector protusions. The sensor subsystem maximum mass, excluding its mounting structure, external wiring harness, and external cables, is 157 kg.

b. Altimeter Antenna (ALTA)

The ALTA is a linearly polarized pyramidal horn designed to operate at L.3~5 GHz. The horn has an estimated radiating aperture of 66 em lE plane) by 28 em (H plane) with a length of 158 em. It is fed by a TNC coax-to-waveguide adapter. Figure 4-12 is a dimensional sketch. The horn will be constructed from wire mesh (0.25 inch or 6 mm opening) supported by a Kevlar honeycomb sandwich frame if acceptable RF performance can be realized. Mesh is desired to improve the efficiency of spacecraft thermal louvres. A light:- weight honeycomb construction will be employed if an acceptable mesh configuration cannot be achieved at reasonable cost. The maximum weight of the antenna .is I kg.

4-27 1J

k~-~ Note: dimensions are approximate, maxim1m envelope is ..,.,.______...=---- E- P'LANE cm------t ----~ I 190 x 80 x 34 em

Figure 4-12. Altimeter Antenna Pyramidal Horn

4-28 630"'1

'l'he horn has a boresight gain of >lb. 5 dBi with a 3 dB beamwidth of >J0° by >10°.

c. Support Equipment

The support equipment (SE) tests and qualifies the sensor and antenna subsystems as flight operational. It also supports the subsystems during spacecraft integration and test. To accomplish this, the SE can simulate Kadar system flight equipment interfaces; generate test sequences and signals; store, record, and display test data; and support SAR system performance testing. The SE also verifies the, sensor subsystem, antenna subsystem, and spacecraft electrical interfaces. The SE consists of the sensor support equipment (SSE), sensor unit BCE, ALTA BCE, and the handling and shipping fixtures.

The SSE consists of a test computer, a Telemetry and Command (T&C) computer, commercial test equipment and some special purpose electronics for the lZadar 'l'arget Simulator (RTS). The computer interfaces with the sensor, ottter test equipment, provides control, and reduces and displays data.

The SAR SSE comprises three functional elements. The first is the commercial test equipment which will monitor all direct access test points, hnd has an interface designed to be mated to the SSE computer.

The second element consists of two computers. The test computer interfaces with the commercial test equipment and the T&C computer provides command and sequence control and displays sensor telemetry data. In addition, the test computer provides data reduction and display capabilities that can provide quantitative results.

The third portion of the radar SSE consists of those elements that support tne instrument as a whole. For example, the sensor requires power from a single centralized source; the electronics generate heat and therefore must have environmental control equipment to maintain the temperature within operational limits; the SSE must also perform specialized tests using equipment such as the SAR Transmit and Return Simulator to measure end to end characteristics of the system.

An overview of the SSE is shown in Figure 4-13. The VRM SAR sensor in the upper portion of the figure is a complete instrument as would be provided in the spacecraft contractor's facility. The instrument mounts on a handling fixture to allow movement of the unit between facilities. The handling fixture incorporates environmental monitoring and control. Heat sensing and heat removal devices are provided to ensure that the instrument never exceeds its operational temperature limits.

4-29 630.,.1

SPACECRAFT r I I I VRM RDS - RADAR DATA STREAM SENSOR T&C - TELEMETRY AND COMMAND I SUBSYSTEM I /F - INTERFACE

DIRECT T&C COAXIAL ~OS ACCESS POWER 1/F 1/F 1/F MULTif'LEXER CONTROL

LABORATORY TARGET TEST SIMULATOR EQUIPMENT ENVIRONMENT CONTROL

FIXTURE i I"~L CENTRAL COMPUTE A AND COMPUTER CONTAINER

Figure 4-13. VRM Radar Sensor Support Equipment

d. Radar Data Processing Subsystem (RDPS)

The RDPS will process telemetered radar data to produce required radar data products. A block diagram of the RDPS is presented in Figure 4-14. 'l'he inputs to the RDPS are the Radar Experiment Data Record (EDR) and the Orbit Ephemeris Record. The Radar EDR will contain all telemetered rauar data and associated ancillary data. Both of the above types of data records will be recorded on 6250 bpi computer-compatible tape (CCT). The RDPS will be used to produce the following radar data records on 6250 bpi CCT:

(l) Unprocessed Altimeter Data Record (UADR) - a complete record of unprocessed altimeter data along with associated ancillary data. This record will also contain unprocessed radiometer data.

4-30 0 0 0

RADAR EXPERIMENT PROCESSOR UNPROCESSED ALTIME1£R DATA RECORDS (D DATA RECORD @ INPUT UNIT I ADVANCED DIGITAL BASIC IMAGE DATA RECORDS I SAR PROCESSOR SPECIAL IMAGE DATA RECORDS (1) I

ORB IT EPHEMER IS RECORD@ ' BASIC RADIOME1£R DATA RECORDS ' ' GLOBAL RADIOMETRY DATA RECORDS PREPROCESSED ALTIME1£R DATA PRODUCTS Q) MULTIMISSION BASIC ALTIME1£R DATA PRODUCTS Q) IMAGE PROCESSING GlOBAL TOPOGRAPHY DATA RECORD LABORATORY QUICK LOOK IMAGE DATA PRODUCTS @ MOSAICKED IMAGE DATA PRODUCTS G) ., 14-- ~ PHOTO PROCESSING POLAR IMAGE DATA PRODUCTS G) LABORATORY ~ SPECIAL RADIOME1£R, ALTIME1£R, & IMAGE DATA PRODUCTS Cl)

NOTES COPIES OF All STANDARD DATA PRODUCTS l. UADR INCLUDES RADIOMETER DATA MAINTAINED IN VRM DATA ARCHIVE 2~ SPECIAL DATA PRODUCTS NOT COVERED IN MOS BUDGET _3. SOME PADR AND BADR DATA PROVIDED ON PRINTOUTS FOR QUICK LOOK 4. QUICK-LOOK BIDR DATA PROVIDED WITH PHOTOPRODUCTS 5. MIDR AND PIDR PROVIDED WITH PHOTOPRODUCTS 6. REDR AND OER INCLUDED IN DATA ARCHIVE

Figure 4-14. RDPS Block Diagram (Simplified) 630=1

(2) Preprocessed Altimeter Data Record (PADR) - a record of range~compressed altimeter data along with associated ancillary data.

(3) Basic Altimeter Data Record (BADR) - a complete set of terrain elevation and radar cross~section data covering the Venus surface observed with the altimeter.

(4) Global Topography Data Record (GTDR) - an integrated set of BADR data in a global presentation.

(5) Basic Image Data Record (BIDR) - a complete record of SAR image strip data corresponding to each orbital pass.

(6) Mosaicked Imaged Data Record (MIDR) - image mosaics covering the observed surface of Venus within +80 degrees of latitude.

(7) Polar Image Data Record (PIDR) - an ordered compilation of acquired image strips within 10° of latitude of the North and South poles of Venus.

(8) Basic Radiometer Data Record (BRDR) - a complete record of radar brightness temperature measurements derived from radiometer data and associated ancillary data.

(9) Global Radiometry Data Record (GRDR) - an integrated set of GTDR data in a global presentation.

The RDPS will also be used to produce the following photoproducts:

(l) Quick-look segments of BIDR image strips corresponding to ~6% of data received at the Goldstone DSN station.

(2) A complete set of the MIDR images.

(3) A complete set of the PIDR images.

The RDPS will also be used to produce computer printouts of a small fraction of the quick-look Altimeter and Radiometer data obtained from the Goldstone DSN station.

In addition to the standard data products described above, the ADSP will be used to produce a variety of special ("second order") data products which are TBD.

1) Processor Input Unit' (PIU). The PIU will perform the following functions:

(a) Playback Radar EDR tapes

(b) Perform demultiplexing, reformatting, and monitoring functions

4-32 630col c (c) Record UADR data and associated ancillary data on 6250 bpi CCT

(d) Output SAR data and associated ancillary data to the ADSP

The PIU will have the capability to ingest Radar EDR data at an average rate of at least L.4 x 106 b/s. The PIU implementation will be based on use of commercially available digital computer equipment. The design, implementa tion, and test of the PIU will be performed by the Hughes Aircraft Company.

2) Advanced Digital SAR Processor. The ADSP will process the telemetered SAR data to produce the Basic Image Data Record. The AUSP comprises two major elements: the control computer and the SAR correlator unit.

The Control Computer will operate on ancillary data to derive SAR processing control parameters and be the focal point of data flow management. Tne control computer will be a VAX computer with commercially available peripherals.

The SAR Correlator Unit will comprise custom-designed digital processing hardware. The key elements will include four high speed discrete Fourier transform units, several dedicated multiplier units, multiple interpolator/resampler units, several dedicated memory units, an azimuth reference generator unit, miscellaneous switching and control elements, and miscellaneous interface and monitor elements.

The correlator unit will perform necessary range compression, azimuth compression, pixel resampling, and multi-look summation functions to transform tlle telemetered SAR data into image data meeting the specified requirements. A basic engineering model ADSP will be produced under sponsorship of the NASA OAST. The VIlli project will fund augmentations needed to meet VRM-unique requirements. The AUSP will be used to meet the SAR processing requirements nf mu h:iple missions during the VRM mission. The ADSP will have the capability to process VRM SAR data at three times the VRM data acquisition rate. Allowing ior the radar duty cycle, the ADSP will be able to process one-week's worth of VRM SAR data in less than 20 hours of ADSP operation.

J) Multimission Image Processing Laboratory (MIPL). The MlPL is an institutionally funded image processing laboratory which will support several different projects during the same time frame as the VRM mission. The principal VRM functions will include the following:

(a) Operate on the Basic Image Data to produce the MIDR tapes, the PIDR tapes, and associated photoproducts.

(b) Operate on the Altimeter Experiment Data to produce the PADR, BADR, and GTDR tapes.

4-33 630-1

(d) Operate on unprocessed radiometer data to produce the BADR and GTDR tapes.

In addition to these standard data products, the MIPL will produce a variety of special data products which are TBD.

4. Mission Operations System

The Mission Operations System (MOS) consists of the organizational teams and ground ?ystem elements required to develop and conduct flight operations for the VRM mission. This system is responsible for executing the mission plan and delivering copies of the first order data products to the Science Teams, using project funded capabilities in conjunction with institu tionally funded capabilities provided by the Office of Telecommunications and Data Acquisition (TDA) and the Flight Project Support Office (FPSO). This system is responsible for the design and development of the VRM-funded capabil ities, with the exception of the Radar Data Processing Facility development which is the responsibility of the Radar System, and the integration of these capabilities with those supplied by the Radar System, the FPSO, the TDA and the Science Teams to establish the Project capability to conduct the required flight operations.

An integrated functional design will be achieved based on requirements derived from a thorough understanding of the end-to-end information flow from the science team/system analysts/mission engineers to the spacecraft (uplink) and from the spacecraft to the science team/system analysts/mission engineers ·~ (downlink). The MOS design will be derived in close cooperation with other / project systems in order to adeq·uately understand the interface and the associated design trade-offs between the MOS and the other systems.

a. Institutionally Funded Capabilities

JPL, through the FPSO and the TDA, is developing an expanded multimission capability in support of flight projects. VRM will commit itself to the use of the these multimission capabilities to the greatest extent practical. Individual support agreements wil be negotiated with these two offices early in the project (see Appendix D, FPSO Support Agreement and Appendix E, TDA Support Agreement). Formal requirements will be placed at a later time through the SIRD and the FPSO Requirements documents.

1) Space Flight Operations Center. The FPSO will provide, through the Space Flight Operations Center (SFOC), hardware, software, resources for computer operations, operations personnel, and facilities for supporting flight operations. The VRM flight operations functions that are multimission in nature will be provided and funded through the SFOC; project peculiar functions will be funded by VRM, with an emphasis on augmentation of the SFOC multimission capabilities where possible.

4-34 ·rhe SFOC support to VRM will include, but not be limited to, the following flight operations functions:

(a) Navigation

(b) Monitoring and Control

ld) Telemetry Data Processing, Analysis and Display

(e) Image Processing

\f) Data Storage, Retrieval and Distribution

(g) Remote Data Base Access

(h) Telecommunications System Analysis

(i) Sequence Generation

(j) Testing

2) Deep Space Network. The TDA will provide the Deep Space Network in support of the VRM Project. The Deep Space Network includes the Network Operations Center and the Deep Space Station Complexes.

a) Network Operations Center. Network Operations Center (NOC) support consists of hardware, software, resources for computer operations, and operations personnel for interfacing the SFOC, including the VRM Mission Support Area, with the Deep Space Stations to achieve communications with the spacecraft flight system. The NOC support to VRM will include:

(1) Operation of DSN and validation of its performance.

(2) Spacecraft telemetry frame synchronization and decoding of data received from the Deep Space Stations.

(3) Command message transmission to Deep Space Stations.

(4) Kadio metric tracking data preconditioning.

b) Deep Space Station Complexes. Support from the Deep Space Station Complexes consists of hardware, software, personnel and procedures to accomplish the following: (1) Transmit commands to the VR~1 spacecraft flight system. (2) Acquire science and engineering data and transmit it to the NOC. (3) Generate and transmit radio metric data to the NOC. (4) Communicate real time radio metric and command data between the Deep Space Stations and the NOC. (5) Implement spacecraft compatibility test requirements.

4-35 .A 6 3 0 "" 1 '-»1 ,. ;;'

The DSN will provide one 34-meter antenna subnet for cruise support and one 64-meter antenna subnet nominally for use during orbit operations for navigation, during maneuvers, and during high-rate telemetry playback periods. The use of an array of two 34-meter antennas in place of a single 64-meter antenna is being considered to reduce conflicts with the Galilee Project for the use of the 64-meter antenna subnet.

h. Project-Funded Capabilities

Due to the multimission support of FPSO and TDA, project resources will be expended only for those personnel, equipment, software, and procedures that are project unique. This support center~ on the needs of the operations teams and science team.

1) Flight Operations Office. The Flight Operations Office (FOO) will be structured into six operations teams, each responsible for a specific aspect of flight operations. These operations teams, tasked with the regular analysis of flight data, development of flight sequences, and the decision-making associated with achieving the mission plan are:

(a) Mission Control Team (MGT)

(b) Spacecraft Team (SCT)

(d) Navigation Team (NAV)

(e) Mission and Sequence Design Team (MSDT)

(f) Radar Data Processing Team (RDPT)

The FOO also includes a Ground Data System Team, responsible for the integration, test, operations and maintenance of the various components of the VRM ground data system, and the System Engineering Staff, responsible for over all system engineering, configuration management, anomaly and failure reporting management, test and training, and the maximum cost-effective utilization of multimission resources.

With the exception of the Mission Control Team, the operations teams will nominally function in a nonreal mode and will be staffed for single shift, fLve days per week operations. The Mission Control Team functions in a real time mode and is staffed by the Project seven days per week, nominally 24 hours per day.

The overall responsibilities and unique staffing considerations of the operations teams are delineated below:

4-36 630 03 1

a) Mission Control Team. The MGT is responsible for the overall monitor of the Spacecraft Flight System (SFS). Its principal functional responsibilities are:

(1) R/T SFS monitor and control

(2) Telemetry processing

(3) Commanding and verification

(4) Sequence of events (SOE) generation

(5) Operations control of the ground system: R/T scheduling, configuration changes, performance monitoring and anomaly resolution

The MCT is supported by members of the multimission operations teams in the SFOC.

b) Spacecraft Team. The SCT is responsible for the overall spacecraft system (SCS) performance. Its principal functional responsibilities are:

(1) NRT analysis and prediction of S/C performance ~ (2) Telecom performance predicts '---- (3) Provide alarm limits and calibration data for the S/C engineering telemetry

( 4) S/C consummable status

~5) Maintain and manage flight S/W

(6) Generate S/C engineering activity requests

(7) Generate integrated sequences, ground command files and real time commands

(8) Anomaly investigations and corrective work-around plans

\'1) Generate P/FKs or anamoly reports.

'l'he SCT is led by and staffed by the Spacecraft System Contractor. JPL personnel will support the team in the telecommunications link analysis area. To facilitate cost-effective operations, the contractor team will be physically split between Pasadena and Denver during noncritical periods.

4-37 L (\ 630"'"1

c) Kadar Engineering Team. The RET is responsible for the overall radar system (RS) performance. Its principal functional responsibilities are:

(1) Nonreal time analysis and prediction of radar engineering performance

(2) Provide alarm limits and calibration data for the RS engineering telemetry

(3) Anomaly investigations and corrective/work-around plans

(4) Generate radar engineering sequence requests and radar control sequence parameters

The RET is led by and staffed by the Radar System contractor. JPL radar system engineering personnel will support this team. The team will be located at JPL to facilitate cost-effective operations.

d) Navigation Team. The NAV is responsible for the overall navigation functions, including maneuver design. Its principal functional responsibilities are:

(1) Orbit determination

(2) Generate trajectory data products

(3) Plan, recommend, and design TCMs and VOl maneuvers and assess S/C maneuver execution accuracy

(4) Provide data to science for gravity experiment

The team will be led and staffed by the Project with support from multi mission navigational and tracking personnel.

e) Mission and Sequence Design Team. The MSDT is responsible for the overall design of the spacecraft sequence. Its principal function~! responsibilities are:

(1) Develop the short and long-range mission planning

(2) Coordinate the collection and approval of sequence requests

(3) Generate ops timelines based on inputs from all ops teams and science desires

f) Radar Data Processing Team. The RDPT is responsible for the overall processing of radar data. Its principal functional responsibilities are:

4-31) fr. I 630~1

(1) Generate basic image and basic altimetry data c records (2) Produce mosaicked image data records

(3) Produce altimetry data products

(4) Produce radar image data products

The team will be led and staffed by Project personnel with support from the Multimission Image Processing Laboratory and the Multimission Photographic Support Facility.

2), Flight Science Office. The Flight Science Office (FSO) is organized under the control of the Project. Manager, separate from the Flight Operations Office (FOO); its relationship to the FOO is to provide the information needed to acquire the required science data based on the analysis of data gathered and the desires of the Science Team members.

The Flight Science Office is organized into several teams according to the areas of interest and expertise (Mission Operations Science Support Team, Gravity/Topography Team, etc.).

The Mission Operations Science Support -Team (MOSST) is composed of key scientists with mission operations experience. The group will be responsible for the coordination and integration of all science inputs from the other science groups, and for obtaining the approval of the Science Manager, Project Scientist, and Project Manager before transmittal of the agreed science requests to the Mission and Sequence Design Team for implementation. In the process of executing this function, the MOSST will closely interface with the Mission and Sequence Design Team, the Radar Engineering Team, and the Radar Data Processing Team. The group will also participate in the review process of uplink products before Project approval for transmission to the Spacecraft.

The Gravity/Topography Team will interface directly with the NAV team in the joint effort of modeling the Venus gravity field.

5. Tracking and Data Systems (TDS)

a. The Deep Space Network

The currently configured Deep Space Network (DSN) includes major Deep Space Communications Complexes (DSCC) located approximately 120 degrees from each other around the earth at Goldstone, California; Madrid, Spain; and Canberra, Australia., These complexes are connected to a central Network Operations Control Center (NOCC) located in Pasadena and Mission Control Centers at JPL Pasadena as well as various other locations via a worldwide Ground Communications Facility (GCF). Each DSCC contains one 64 m diameter antenna and one 34-m diameter antenna. The Deep Space Stations (DSS) are characterized by high-power transmitters, low-noise microwave amplifiers, phase-locked loop receiving systems, and multiple digital data handling subsystems controlled by minicomputers. See Reference 4-1 for additional detailed information.

4-39 630.,.1

The primary functions of the Deep Space Network for the VRM Mission are: i~ (1) Acquisition of science and engineering data radiated from the spacecraft to Earth at S- and X-band frequencies.

(:L) Transmission of command signals from Earth to the spacecraft at S and X-band frequencies.

(3) Generation of radio metric (Doppler and range), Very Long Baseline Interferometry (VLBI), and calibration data, which are used for navigation of spacecraft and for research into the gravity field of Venus.

c. Augmentation of Deep Space Network Capability

During the mid-1980s several augmentations of Deep Space Network capability which are crucial to meeting the objectives of the VRM Mission will be implemented. The most important of these are described in the following paragraphs.

l) X-band Uplink. X-band uplink capability will be added to the 34 m High Efficiency (REF) Subnet and will be utilized in the VRM gravity field experiment.

2) Telemetry Data Rate. Currently, the DSN Telemetry System is limited to a maximum downlink telemetry data rate of 250 kb/s. To ~ accommodate the VRM requirement of 268.8 kb/s, the Maximum Likelihood 1 ) Convolutional Decoder Assemblies at each DSCC will undergo testing to allov7 downlink telemetry data rates of at least 300 kb/s.

3) 70-m Extension Project and a Third 34-m REF Antenna. During l':1~b-1<:.llj7, the 64 m Subnet will be upgraded by extending each 64-m antenna to 70-m, shaping the reflector, and incorporating a higher efficiency feed. This upgrading will ameliorate the support conflict in early 1989 between Galilee and VKM, by allowing Galilee to be supported solely by the 7U-m subnet and allowing both 34-m antennas at Canberra and Goldstone to be arrayed as required for VRM support. Additionally, a third 34-m REF antenna will be added at the Madrid, Spain DSCC, thus allowing 34-m arraying, initially for VKM, at all DSN complexes.

6. Launch Vehicle System (LVS)

a. Introduction

The Launch Vehicle System (LVS) for the VRM mission consists of the Centaur G upper stage, its airborne support equipment, the Space Shuttle and their respective support facilities.

4-40 b. NSTS (Space Shuttle and Supporting Elements)

The National Space Transportation System (NSTS) consists of the Space Shuttle (including orbiter, main engines, external tank, and SRBs), the Eastern Launch and Landing Site (KSC), the Mission Control Center (JSC), Secondary and Contingency Landing Sites, and communications facilities (including TDRSS and the NASCOM Network).

c. Centaur G

The upper stage which provides the additional mission energy requirements over that available from the Shuttle Orbiter is a derivative of the Atlas and Titan-Centaur which has been in use for two decades. The Centaur G flight vehicle (see Fig. 4-15) consists of a 120-in. (3 m) diameter LOz tank that transitions to a 170-in. (4.3 m) diameter 1Hz tank. The cryogenic tanks are insulated with combinations of helium-purged foam blankets and radiation shields. The forward end of the vehicle consists of a bolted-on forward adapter which provides mounts for all vehicle electronics packages. The aft end of the vehicle consists of a cylindrical aft adapter and a pyrotechnic separation ring. The Centaur main propulsion system consists of two Pratt & Whitney RL10A-3-3B engines rated at 15,000 lbf thrust each.

The Centaur and its payload are supported in the Shuttle Orbiter by the Centaur Integrated Support System (CISS). In addition to providing mechanical support during ascent, the CISS rotates the combined Centaur/spacecraft for deployment from the shuttle and performs all control functions for vehicle safety while the Centaur is attached to the Shuttle Orbiter.

1237.5 1273.113 1302.1 I

I:EIITAUIII

Figure 4-15. Centaur G Configuration

4-41 630.,.1 c. TECHNOLOGY PLAN

1. Kadar System

The VRM radar system differs from previous (SEASAT and SIR-A) radar systems flown by JPL in several important respects. These are: S-band frequency, "open-loop" commanding, elliptical orbit, "small" antenna, use of special SAR processor for data correlation, and two methods of data rate compression ~a block floating-point quantizer and burst-mode data collection with on-board buffering). Although none of these new methods employ new hardware per se, the use of the hardware integrated into a radar system is new.

The S-band frequency of 2.385 GHz is near the limit of transistorized transmitters, but radar transmitters of this type have been built and a preliminary evaluation of the transistors indicates that this will not be a difficulty. SEASAT and SIR-A had a frequency of 1.275 GHz.

The 11 open-loop 11 commanding of a SAR will be new to VRM. The system depends upon accurate predictions of altitude versus time throughout a mapping pass; however, the prediction accuracy requirements are within the navigation capability.

The elliptical orbit leads to difficulties in both data collection and data processing. In data collection, accurate prediction of echo return-time and frequency adjustment of the radar parameters and antenna pointing are required to maintain the echo signal in the data collection window of the required intensity. After collection and transmission to Earth, the data ~..· processor must be very adaptable in order to accommodate the large number of ~ ) changes in the radar system during a mapping pass. The processor will make use of data encoded in the radar data stream and ancillary data to make the required changes.

The "small", 3.7-m diameter antenna requires the pulse repetition frequencies (PRFs) to be high in.order to reduce azimuth ambiguities. High PRFs mean a "tight" design to maximize incidence angle at any altitude. Usually, SAR antennas are planar arrays with a form factor dictated by look angle and altitude. The VRM antenna (inherited from Voyager and shared by the Spacecraft Telecommunication Subsystem) has a form factor of ~1. 0 which restricts the radar system to certain look angles as a function of altitude. '!he circular antenna also means a circular pattern which is different than a planar pattern in which the range and azimuth patterns are orthogonal. Ambiguities for a circular pattern are not independent in range and azimuth, and the analysis techniques must accommodate this difference.

A special advanced digital SAR processor (ADSP) will be used to correlate the SAR data and produce images. The ADSP will have multimission capability and a throughput far in excess of the VRM requirements. A week's worth of VR}1 data will easily be processed in a 40-hour work week. The processor will be tested prior to VRM on several missions. Some additional hardware and software will be required for VRM's special modes and processing requirements. (j

4-42 630"'1

SARs usually operate in a continuous mode with a quantizer of fixed value. VRM will operate in burst mode with an altitude-dependent duty factor of from 1~/o to JO%. A further reduction in data rate is made possible by the use of a block floating-point quantizer (BFPQ) which operates like a fast automatic gain control (AGC). The implementation for VRM is 8-bits in and 3-bits out. This gives a further 8/3 factor of data reduction while maintaining the dynamic range. Both of these methods are being investigated very thoroughly to under stand the impacts on system design. It is known that the burst mode introduces variations in the image not found in continuous-mode SAR: variations of signal-to-noise in azimuth (or scalloping), variations of ambiguity in range and azimuth, and variations in looks and azimuth resolution. These factors have been taken into account in the design and their effects on image interpretability reduced.

The spacecraft tape recorder system requires a constant data rate from the radar which requires the radar to buffer or smooth the data flow with a "burst buffer memory." This memory is located in the radar and accepts formatted data from the SAR, altimeter, and logic and control so that the data contained in the memory is properly annotated. The memory must be large enough to accommodate the largest single burst during a mapping pass. As the radar moves through a pass, the optimum burst size changes, requiring the radar logic to increase or reduce the amount of burst buffer memory used.

All these "new" methods have been designed into a radar system employing previously used hardware techniques. No part of the system is really new, but the amalgamation of these parts into the VRM radar system is new and advances the system state of art.

l. Spacecraft System

The Spacecraft System contains no new technology and only a few new designs. The inherited hardware and designs are uniquely integrated with the limited new designs to meet the specific requirements of the Venus Radar Napper mission.

D. FACILITIES

The facilities that will be utilized by the VRM Project are as follows:

(1) Those facilities at the radar system contractor (Hughes Aircraft Co.) required to manufacture, assemble and test the flight equipment.

(Z) Those facilities at the spacecraft systems contractor (Martin Denver) required to assemble, integrate and test the flight spacecraft prior to shipping to Kennedy Space Center.

(J) The prelaunch facilities at KSC/CCAFS which will include the Vertical Processing Facility (VPF), the Payload Processing Facility (PPF), or if construction is completed in time to support the Project schedule, the Hazardous Payload Facility (HPF), plus those USN network facilities required to support pre-launch and

4-43 630 ... 1

compatability testing between the spacecraft, MIL-71 and the JPL MOS. The JSC Mission Control Center is required.

( 4 J i'he launch facilities at KSC Complex 39 as described in Reference 4-5.

(~) Those USN facilities to support flight operations as defined in the Support Instrumentation Requirements Document (SIRD) to be published in October 1985.

(o) A Mission Operations Complex or Mission Support Area that is expected to be located in JPL Bldg. 230 or 264.

E. FLIGHT OPERATIONS PLAN

This section summarizes now flight operations are conducted. The elements involved during mission operations were discussed in Section IV.B.4. Their relationships during flight operations are presented in this Section.

1. Launch Operations

a. Responsiblities

The Vl{M Project will retain prime responsiblity for test, checkout, servicing operations, etc. of the spacecraft and its GSE prior to integration with the Centaur and entering the STS timeline. Integrated activities will be the responsiblity of the appropriate NASA organization. ~ The NASA/KSC Cargo Integration Office is responsible for the STS launch and ·._ -· landing support services required for stand-along and integrated checkout and for ground integration of the cargo and the STS. A Launch Site Support Manager, who will be assigned to this cargo as the single point of contact, wLll receive and coordinate requirements and provide formal documentation in the form of the Launch Site Support Plan (annex 8 to the Payload Integration PLan).

b. Launch Operations Overview

The process is described in terms of the "facilities" which the spaceeraft utilizes:

(1) Payload Processing Facility/Hazardous Payload Facility (PPF/HPF) - A PPF/HPF will be used for receiving inspection, assembly, test, checkout, and flight preparations.

(2) Vertical Processing Facility (VPF) - The flight-ready spacecraft will be transported to the VPF for mating and interface verifi cation with the Centaur. Subsequently, cargo-to-STS interfaces will be verified with the Cargo Integration Test Equipment (CITE) which simulates shuttle functions. After CITE testing, the cargo will be placed in the KSC transporation canister for the move to the launch pad.

4-44 ~I ~otating Service Structure (RSS) -Once at the pad, the canister '--· will be hoisted into the RSS and the cargo extracted from it. Any final preparations required prior to installtion into the cargo bay ~an be performed in the RSS.

(4) Shuttle Orbiter Cargo Bay - The RSS will be rotated into position and the cargo will be installed into the cargo bay. The cargo will be mechanically and electrically connected, interfaces verified, and end-to-end tests conducted. Finally, the integrated cargo/STS will be counted down and launched.

l. Mission Operations Organization and Interrelationships

Mission operations will be directed from JPL following the separation of the spacecraft flight syst~m from the LVS. The mission operations organization is shown in Figu~e 4-16. The Project Manager, or his delegate, will act as the Mission Director. The Operations Manager is responsible to the Project Manager for the day-to-day operations activity, exclusive of the activities of the Science teams for the interpretation of data. Each operations team provides expertise required to execute the mission plan. Regular inputs from the Science Teams, coordinated through the Project Scientist, to the mission operations teams are planned. Representatives of the TOA and the FPSO are included as members of the Project staff and will assure the availability of required facilities and functional capabilities as shown in the Network Support Plan and the FPSO Support Plan. The integrated direction of the Space Flight Operations Center and Deep Space Network in support of the VRM Project is the responsibility of the Operations Manager.

the interactions of the operations teams and the science teams in executing the mission plan are depicted in Figure 4-17. For simplicity in showing the information, the interactions are grouped according to downlink and uplink. "Downlink" refers to the process necessary to monitor and analyze the information obtained by the spacecraft, whereas "uplink" refers to the process necessary to develop commands to be sent to the spacecraft.

4-45 PROJECT MANAGER

PROJECT STAFF SCIENTIST

OPERATIONS SCIENCE MANAGER MANAGER

MISSION r- OPERATIONS SPACE Fll GHT DEEP SPACE SCIENCE OPERATIONS SUPPORT TEAM NETWORK CENTER 0} GRAVITY/ ~ TOPOGRAPHY SYSTEM GROUND - 0 " TEAM ENGINEERING 1---1--1 DATA SYSTEM D STAFF TEAM 1-\

CARTOGRAPHY - TEAM

r------.------r------1 1 · 1 DATA PRODUCTS i I ~TEAM ~--~~~i i i ~~~~==~----~I I MISSION SPACECRAFT RADAR MISSION & RADAR DATA NAVIGATION CONTROL TEAM ENGINEERING SEQUENCE PROCESSING TEAM TEAM (MMC) TEAM (HAC) DESIGN TEAM TEAM

Figure 4-16. VRM Operations Organization () () (~) ()

==·~RA~D~A~R::..::::DA~TA!....______~r----, • QLALT PROD DATA • TELEMETRY • RADAR DATA • DSN MONITOR C MCT • QL ALTIM RDPT • DOPPLER • SPEC REQSTS NAV • ORBIT PARM SCIENCE • AlARM TEAMS • CALIB NOTICE • AlARM LIMITS • S/C ENGR eOPS

SCT RET MSDT • RADAR PERF • RADAR PERF

• S/C PERF DOWN LINK UPLINK ---- • RESOURCE AVAilABILITY eSOE ALL TEAMS • SEQ REQUESTS UPLINK~-~ MCT

SCIENCE NAV TEAMS • CMOS • ORBIT PARM MSDT • SEQ REQUESTS • OPS TIMELINE SCT ALL TEAMS • SEQ • RADAR CNTRL PARM RET REQUESTS

• SEQ TIMELINE

Figure 4-17. Information Flow Between Teams 630-1

3. Sequence Design and Implementation

Sequences for the acquisition of science data and for performing spacecraft engineering functions will be developed by the Mission and Sequence Design Team. Generation of the integrated sequence of events file for subse quent transmission to the spacecraft will be done by tbe Spacecraft Team. Inputs from all operational teams focus on the MSDT in deciding what will be accomplished in each mission sequence and the timeline for doing it. The SCT will perform constraint checking, manage the on-board computer memory load, generate the required command sequences and assure proper validation for the sequence loads.

Sequences will be loaded three times per week, meaning each sequence will cover twb or three days. Straightforward sequences will be used with repeti tive events occurring from orbit-to-orbit, with adjustments in initiation and ending times of events and radar parameters occurring as a function of geome try. Adaptability and its associated complexity is not being designed into the sequence generation process. Sequence generation software will be run on a large-scale computer.

Execution of sequence commands will be accomplished through the Mission Control Team interfacing with the SFOC multimission command system. The MCT will also execute real-time command transmissions as requested by the SCT on the basis of engineering analysis by the SCT or the Radar Engineering Team.

4. Data Acquisition and Generation

The data acquisition and generation plan is based on science, engineering, and navigation requirements and on negotiated availability with the DSN. VRM TDA requirements and projected TDA support are displayed in Table 4-8.

Achievement of the high-rate playback telemetry X-band link requires the 64-m antenna subnet. The use of a subnet employing two arrayed 34-m antennas as an alternate means of receiving this telemetry is being examined.

5. Data Processing

Telemetry data processing during VRM flight operations is summarized as follows:

(1) The Deep Space Stations receive telemetry from the spacecraft and send the low-volume engineering data to the NOC in real time; the high volume X-band playback data is recorded at the DSS on CCTs and returned to the NOC in nonreal time.

(L) A portion of the playback data received at the Goldstone DSS is transmitted post-pass to the NOC for quick-look analysis.

(3) Frame synchronization of spacecraft telemetry data occurs in the DSN.

4-48 11 Table 4-~. VRM TDA Coverage Requirements

Mission Telemetry Acquisition Nav Tracking l:'hase Requirements Requirements

I to I + 14 days Continuous coverage of low Continuous with 2-way (TCH-1 + 4d) rate engineering telemetry. Doppler (and angles through I + 5 days)

I + l4d to 2 passes/day of low rate One complete, over I + lMd (TCM-2 - ld) engineering. lapping pair of Madrid-Golds tone I + l~d to I + 34d Continuous coverage of low passes and one (TCM-l - 2d to rate engineering telemetry. complete overlapping TCM-2 + 4d) pair of Goldstone Australia passes I + j4d to 2 passes/day of low every other day with VOl - lL.d rate engineering telemetry. coherent two-way (TCM-2 + 4d to Doppler plus 3-way VOl - lL.d) Doppler during over laps.

VOI-l2d to VOl .Continuous coverage of low Continuous with 2-way rate engineering telemetry. Doppler, plus 3-way where available.

VOl to EOM Continuous coverage of high Continuous except rate science and engineering when occulted or telemetry. mapping, with 2-way Doppler, and 3-way Doppler during overlap.

NOTE: TCM dates approximate.

4-49 (4) SAR, altimeter, engineering, and navigation data are ~ 1 transferred to the SFOC multimission data management system ) via the local area network. The data management system will also be the repository of various data records prepared from the four data types. These records are then accessible by the respective processing/analysis teams.

(5) SAR and altimetry data will be processed by the radar data processing facility, comprised of some VRM-funded capabilities (AUSP modifications and the PIU) and FPSO-funded capabilities (MIPL and MPSF), from which the first-order photo and computer products will be prepared.

(6) The science products will be catalogued and archived for later retrieval and analysis. The VRM science team budgets allow the creation of second-order products in the MIPL/MPSF.

(7) Engineering data will be decommutated, converted to engineering units, and alarm monitored at microcomputer-based work stations provided by the SFOC. Access to engineering analysis programs will also be available through these work stations.

(H) Spacecraft team analysts in Denver will access the SFOC-funded data management system to allow analysis of spacecraft performance during noncritical mission phases.

Radio metric data processing is summarized as follows:

(1) Radio metric data is generated at the DSSs and conditioned in the NOC prior to use in the orbit determination process.

(2) The edited data file is processed by the Navigation team in a dedicated minicomputer to prepare the spacecraft orbit ephemeris.

(J) The planetary ephemeris development and maintenance is accomplished through SFOC multimission resources.

(4) Maneuver calculations will be performed in a large scale computer based on the orbit ephemeris and selected telemetry data.

F. END-TO-END INFORMATION SYSTEM

The VRM Project will ensure that there is design compatibility between the number of Project and non-Project elements that affect the flow of VRM data, Doth uplink and downlink. This will be accomplished by looking at the collection of data handling elements, already parts of identifiable systems with implementation responsibilities, in a systematic, end-to-end fashion to assure that there is adequate:

4-50 630~1

(1) definition of information needs, ~I..._ .. (L) specification and integration interface design between data handling elements, and

(J) verification of the performance of the integrated elements via test.

The VKM End-to-£nd Information System (EElS) is the result.

The EElS is specifically a system engineering endeavor without direct implementation responsibility. It allows the implementation of many system elements with a high confidence that they will work properly with elements of other systems to create the integrated, end-to-end flow of data to support the VKH information needs.

The key characteristics of the EElS are:

(1) Spacecraft Flight System-related:

(a) Distributed processing on-board using microprocessors.

(b) NASA standard hardware.

(d) Real-time telemetry: (S-band) 1,200 or 40 kb/s.

~:...___. (e) S and X-band command: 31.25 or 7.8125 kb/s.

(L) Tracking and Data-Systems-related:

(a) 34 and 64-m station subnets.

(b) S and X-band telemetry.

(d) Angle, Doppler, and narrow-band ~VLBI data.

(e) Kadio metric tracking data conditioning.

(f) Spacecraft telemetry frame synchronization and decoding of data.

(3) Space Flight Operations Center-related:

(a) Real time data processing in SFOC multimission computers.

(b) Nonreal time engineering data processing in a dedicated minicomputer and/or in microcomputer-based work stations. ,.,..., \., __ '

4-51 630~1

(.c) Nonreal time SAR data processing in the Division 33 ADSP, modified to provide project-peculiar capabilities.

(d) Nonreal time image processing in SFOC Multimission Image Processing Facility (MIPL).

Figure 4-18 depicts the data flow through the VRM EElS. The key design features are:

(1) Radar data recorded for subsequent playback to Earth when high-gain not used for mapping.

(L) Engineering data recorded when antenna is not Earth-oriented.

(J) Playback of data occurs during orbit in which it is acquired.

(4) High-rate playback data transmitted on X-band link.

(~) Maximum data rate is 268.8 b/s.

(bJ High-rate playback data recorded on tape and shipped to the NOC at JPL, except for 6% quick-look data extracted from playback data stream and transmitted post-pass from Goldstone DSS.

\f) First-order mosaicked image products available to science team. The ground-based elements of the VRM Information System are provided by (.., both Project and non-project contributors as shown in Table 4-9.

G. RELEASE OF HISSION RESULTS

The primary objective of the VRM data release policy is to provide for timely and orderly dissemination of scientific information to the public and scientific community. This policy consists of two parts: (1) scientific reporting, including symposia, publications in scientific journals, and release of flight data to the National Space Science Data Center for use by other members of the science community, and (2) public information or newo 1nedia releases generally associated with the current orbital activities.

A Project (Science) Data Management Plan will be prepared as required by NMI 6030. JA.

l. Scientific Reporting

Scientific analysis and interpretation of data from space flight are the responsibility of the Investigator Group or team involved. There must be adequate preparation to permit prompt analysis and reporting of the data. As a part of his contract, the Principal Investigator, Team Leader Guest Investigator or Interdisciplinary Scientist will be responsible for assuring that the data from his experiment or investigation are converted to a form usable by other scientists, and making these data available to the scientific community through the National Space Science Data Center.

4-52 0 0 0

SPACECRAFT FLIGHT SYSTEM l GROUND SYSTEM HI-RATE HI-RATE DMS TLM I X-BAND hLM TLM TLM r I - EDR • RADAR DATA I DATA - HI-RATE - DATA - RECORD/ I • CONV CODE DATA • S/X ODR • DE BLOCK SFDU's PROCESSOR PLAYBACK • EXTRACT RECEIVE BIDR & • SCIENCE & • MODULATE iz- • METRIC • DECOM QIDR tHI-RATE S-BAND • TIME TAG DATA PROC ENGINEER I NG • S/XXMIT I DATA LO-RATE • DISPLAY & ANALYSIS SCIENCE • GCF BLK •GND ALARM RADAR • X-s DOWN- ENGR DATA DATA LO-RATE TRANSPORT SFDU's SEDR •ARCHIVE CONVERT • ODR • COLLECT • DECODE IMAGING 1--z..... ACCN'T RADAR • MONITOR PHOTO • FORMAT LO-RATE • BLK RECALL • DATA ENGR PROD ENGR •FRAME MNGMNT DATA • TIME TAG I SYNC • MOSAICKING ALTIMETRY" • SYSTEM I I • SFDU FORMAT CMOS STATUS • PHOTO PROD • DATA REC I CMD I CMD • RT MONITOR I ~M!l S-BAND - •MISSION ENGR • DETECT CMD • S/X RECEIVE ~ •STORE CMDS CMD PLAN SPACECRAFT DATA BITS CONTROL CMD CONTROLS CMD ENGR • DECODE • BIT SYNC •XMIT • SEQUENCE SUBSYSTEM I • STORE • XLATION GENERATION •ERROR DETECT • BIT DETECT •ERROR DETECT CONFIRMA- SEQUENCE X-llAND • NAVIGATION CORRECT & ABORT XMIT • XMIT • CONTROL FILES CMOS· _s- CONF TION PLAN • STORE • DISTRIBUTE I I I CDS SXA DSCC's NOC SFOC I VRM RFS UNIQUE MDS MULTIMISS ION .I

Figure 4-18. VRM Data Flmv 630""1 .;

Table 4-9. Providers of VRM Ground-Based EElS Capabilities

Provider Ground-Based EEIS VRM Capabilities SFOC DSN LVS PROJECT PI

Navigation (NRT) X X

Mission Sequence (NRT) X X

Engineering (NRT) X X

Tracking X X

Telemetry (R/T & NRT) X X X X

Command (R/T) X X X X

Ground Monitor (R/T) X X X

Data Management (NRT) X

;yussion Design (NRT) X X

Science Data Processing (NRT) X X X 0

Data Archiving & Distribution (NRT) X X

R/T = Real Time Capability NRT = Nonreal Time Capability

4-54 The project will provide adequate analysis time and resources for each science investigator group science team, quest investigator and interdisciplinary scientist and also to assure the prompt availability of useful scientific data to the science community at large.

The preliminary and summary reports will be of high scientific quality and will serve either as the basis for or be suitable for publication in scientific journals.

The Project preliminary and summary reports will be a compilation of these reports (which may be in the form of preprints) with appropriate introductory and summary material.

2. Orbital Activities

It is NASA-OSSA policy to release to the press, in as close to real time as possible, the preliminary results from space flight scientific investigations. Images such as television pictures and hard-copy photographs will also be released in a similar manner. The scientist or PI conducting the experiment or investigation will be responsible for providing a scientific description of the released data. Each investigator is encouraged to discuss his activities with representatives of the news media in accordance with his group or team management plan. Moreover, each investigator must confine his discussion to his particular investigation and to any other information about the Project previously approved by NASA for release.

Public information releases and public relations activities will be coordinated and governed by an integrated public relations plan which will govern public release of data, press relations, public symposiums, and presentations for the entire Project.

Press conferences will be held to present to the public significant scientific results obtained from the analysis of the data. Prior to each press conference, the Project Science Group will meet to review the preliminary results to be reported to the press. The purpose of this meeting is to promote interexperiment comparison and to identify areas of apparent agreement and disagreement.

H. ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

No environmental issues have developed to date. The environmental implications and alternatives of the Vllli Project are considered equivalent to those of any other project, whether NASA, DOD, or commercial, which does not utilize KTGs and is launched by the Shuttle Orbiter/Centaur from Cape Canaveral. An environmental statement for the VRM Project will be issued by NASA Headquarters which will provide the singular such statement for the Project and which will cover all elements of the Project.

4-5.') REFERENCES

4-l. Deep Space ~etwork/Flight Project Interface Design Handbook, JPL Internal Document ~10-5, Revision D, Volumes 1 and 2, December 1, 1~83 and February 1, 1984, respectively.

4-z. Space Shuttle Payload Accomodations, JSC 07700, Vol. XIV, Rev. H, JSC, May 1983.

4-3. Shuttle Systems Requirements for Shuttle/Centaur Stage and Airborne Support Equipment, Appendix 10.16 to JSC 07700, Vol. X, May 1983.

4-4. Space Shuttle Flight and Ground System Specification, JSC 07700, Vol. X, Rev. D, JSC, October 1983.

4-5. NASA Payload Users Guide, KSC-DL-116, KSC.

4-56 630=1

SECTION V

MANAGEMENT PLAN

The overall direction and evaluation of the NASA Solar System Exploration Division (SSED) program are responsibilities of the NASA Office of Space Science and Applications (OSSA). The Associate Administration for OSSA has delegated authority to the Director of the SSED for the direct management of this program. The Director has designated a Program Manager and a Program Scientist for the VRM mission. The VRM Program Manager is responsible for implementing the overall direction and evaluation of the Project. Management of the project is the responsibility of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, operated by the California Institute of Technology under a prime contract with NASA.

The Director of JPL has assigned the responsibility for all Flight Project activity, including VRM, to the Assistant Laboratory Director for Flight Pro jects (ALDFP). Management responsibilities and procedures for the Project are implemented in accordance with Refs. 5-l and 5-2.

A. PROJECT ORGANIZATION AND ROLES

The VRM Project Organization is shown in Fig. 5-l. The following paragraphs contain role statements for the principal VRM organizational f'ositions.

l. Project Manager

The Project Manager is the senior Project official responsible for planning and executing the Project. He is responsible within the defined constraints and boundary conditions for achieving the mission objectives on schedule at the committed costs. He is responsible for the adequacy of the technical approach, for appropriate balancing of risks, and for ensuring that reliable practices, procedures and implementations are employed.

The Project Manager reports administratively to the Assistant Laboratory Director for Flight Projects. He is responsible for assuring adequate upper management surveillance of the the Project, for conducting appropriate independent reviews, and for seeking the necessary advice and counsel when appropriate. He must assure compliance with all pertinent Laboratory policies, practices, and procedures.

' C/

5-1 1.

VENUS RAOAR MAPPER

J. H. Gerpheide, Mgr 6 Secy Mona Jasnow I I I I SAFETY OFFICE FINANCE 6 PROJECT QUAL! TY ASSURANCE 0. Quinn 0 SCIENTIST ANO RELIABILITY 0. Ross PROCUREMENT S I C - C. Reiz 6. Safety Engineer E. R. S. Saunders R. 0. Can nova, Mgr. 0 SAR - S. P. Dombrowski o 6

l I I I J I ' LAUNCH RADAR SYSTEM SPACECRAFT SCIENCE AND TRACKING AND MISSION VEHICLE SYSTEM SYSTEM MISSION DESIGN DATA SYSTEMS OPERATIONS

J. Borsody, Mgr. (LeRCl E. E. Kellum, Mgr G. Parker. Mgr. S. S. Dallas, Mgr A. L. Berman, Mgr. A. G. Conrad, Mgr. U1 6. I 6 6 0 6 N I I HUGHES MARTIN AIRCRAFT CO. MARirnA CORP ..

------~------.-~ ------JPL TECHNICAL DIVISIONS I I I I I I I I 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 51 1-'·. TELECOMMUNI- MISSION EARTH AND CONTROL APPLIED INFORMATION OBSERVATIONAL QUALITY SYSTEMS CATIONS SUPPORT AND SPACE SCIENCES AND ENERGY . MECHANICS SYSTEMS SYSTEMS ASSURANCE AND SCIENCE AND CONVERSION OPERATIONS RELIABILITY ENGINEERING

0 INDIRECT CHARGE

6 CO-LOCATED WITH PROJECT

Figure 5-l. VRM Project Organizational Structure

0 0 () ·~ 2. Project Scientist

The Project Scientist is adminstratively attached to the Space Science Division and functionally assigned to the Project i1anager. He is the principal science advisor to the Project Manager and is the principal science interface between the Project Manager and the Investigators. He is responsible for the development of the science requirements and has a major role in science budget preparation and approval: he ensures that the Project provides science analysis support to all science elements of the Project, and that software development, calibration plans and science data processing are budgeted by each Principal Investigator, Science Team Leader or other science element of the Project.· He assures that the scientific investigations are capable of achieving the mission scientific objectives. He chairs the Project Science Group and is an ex-officio member of all science teams and working groups. He is responsible for obtaining information concerning the progress of the scientific investigations and the impact of program decisions on these investigations.

The Project Scientist has the responsibility for the overall welfare of the scientific investigations performed during the mission and keeps the Project informed of scientific theories relevant to the objectives of the mission. He provides the science interface between the Science and Mission Design Manager and the Principal Investigators. In case of major conflicts between the requirements of different investigations, he investigates the implications and seeks the recommendation of the Project Science Group.

3. Science and Mission Design Manager

The Science and Mission Design Manager reports administratively to the Project Manager. He is responsible for the science investigation implementation and allocation of funds and for the Project mission design ~nd navigation development. His responsibilities include:

(a) Leading the Project Design Team which address~s issues that impact more than one of the Project Systems.

(b) Mission Design Team.

(d) Mission performance analyses (LVS, Centaur and the Space craft), including mass allocation and margin management.

(e) Preparation and publication of the Mission Requirements Document (630-7) and Mission Plan (630-50).

(£) Preparation and publication of the Performance Assessment Report (630-75)

(g) Definition of launch constraints.

(h) Preparation and publication of planetary quarantine analyses.

5-3 630=1

(i) Navigation Development Team.

(j) Preparation and publication of the Navigation Plan (630-51).

(k) Science Management.

(1) Science requirements on (1) mission sequencing and commanding, (2) mission planning for sequence generation, and (3) sequence design and integration.

(m) Science requirements on the Radar, Spacecraft, and Mission Operations Systems.

(n) Preparation and publication of Science Requirements (630-5) which may incorporate the elements of the Project Science Data Management Plan (required by N~I 8030.3A as a Project data management plan). Therefore, he is also responsible for Project science data analysis requirements, plans, implementation and allocation of funds.

(o) Guest Investigator Program implementation and allocation of funds.

(p) Manage Science and Mission Design within cost.

4. Radar System Manager

The Radar System Manager reports administratively to the Project Manager and has overall technical, cost, and schedule responsibility for the Radar System. Radar System activities include both the contractor's efforts and the JPL in-house effort relative to the development of the hardware and software required for generation of the SAR data records, altimeter data records and images. The Radar System Manager's responsibilities include:

(a) Radar System requirements and overall system engineering, reliability and quality assurance of Radar System deliverables.

(b) Engineering design and testing required to develop a Radar System which can produce mosaicked image data products and altimeter records (including radiometry) which meet the Science and Mission requirements and constraints.

(d) Through the Radar System Contractor, designing, developing and testing the radar sensor subsystem and associated support equipment and delivering the sub-~ystem and its SE to the Spacecraft System Contractor.

(e) Through the Radar System Contractor, designing, developing and testing the altimeter antenna and delivering the antenna and its SE to the Spacecraft System Contractor.

5-4 (f) Designing, developing and testing the Radar Data Processing Subsystem and delivering the subsystem to the Mission Operations System Manager.

(g) Providing Radar System documentation including:

(l) Radar System Requirements.

{.2) MOS - Radar System Interface Requirements.

(3) Radar Sensor Specification.

(4) Radar Data Processing Subsystem Specification.

(5) Altimeter Antenna Specification.

(h) Participate as a Member of the Project Design Team.

5. Spacecraft System Manager

The Spacecraft System Manager reports administratively to the Project Manager and has overall technical, cost, and schedule responsibility for th~ Spacecraft System, including the Spacecraft System Contract and JPL in-house effort to support and manage the contract or accomplish specific identified tasks. Specific responsibilities include:

(a) Assuring that the Spacecraft is designed to meet appropriate design, performance and environmental requirements. Publishing and controlling the "Spacecraft System Functional Requirements Document."

(b) Assuring the success, effectiveness and design adequacy of the Spacecraft interfaces with the Radar System, the Space Transportation System, the Tracking and Data Acquisition System, and the Mission Operations System. Publishing and jointly controlling the Interface Requirements Documents.

(d) Assuring that the Spacecraft meets the design, performance and environmental requirements through a comprehensive program ot' tests and analyses.

(e) Assuring that the Spacecraft is developed and tested in accordance with appropriate and approved Reliability, Quality Assurance, Configuration Management and Safety Plans.

(f) Providing visibility of technical, schedule and cost status ann the identification of problems and appropriate corrective action.

(g) Participating as a member of the Project Design Team.

5-5 630~1

6. Mission Operations System Manager

The Missions Operations System Manager reports administratively to the Project Manager and has overall technical, cost, and schedule responsibility for the Mission Operations System (MOS). He is responsible for:

(1) The MOS and its included element, the Ground Data System.

(2) MOS system design and the MOS Design Team.

(3) Securing SFOC support to the MOS.

(4) Securing TDS support to the MOS.

(5) MOS design verification; overall system engineering, including software; and reliability and quality assurance functions.

(6) MOS configuration management, including change control.

(7) Preparing and publishing the Flight Operations Plan.

(8) MOS/TDS/SFOC integration to ensure capability to conduct required flight operation, and to support prelaunch tests involving the SFOC and STS.

(9) Approving, with other system managers, the SFS-MOS Com- patibility Test Plan, and the SFS-MOS Verification Test Plan.

(10) Preparing and publishing, with the support of other system ~. / managers, the Project Software Management Plan.

(11) Coordinating the resources of the MOS, SFOC, and TDS to assure timely and proper processing of various data types and the transmission of commands to execute the mission plan.

(12) In-flight performance evaluation and the development of con tingency/work-around plans to accommodate anomalous behavior.

(13) Development and execution of mission sequences.

(14) Orbit determination, maneuver analysis and navigation functions.

(15) Delivery of first-order data products to the Science Team.

(16) Participating as a member of the Project Design Team.

7. Tracking and Data Systems Manager

The Tracking and Data Systems (TDS) Manager represents the JPL Telecommunications and Data Acquisition Office to the Project. He is a member of the Project Staff and reports functionally to the Project Manager for all TDS matters in support of the Venus Radar Mapper mission. He is accountable to the JPL Assistant Laboratory Director for Telecommunications and Data

5-6 630"'1

Acquisition for the execution of his responsibilities and the proper execution of TDS support for the mission. He supports the MOS Manager in the design, implementation and operation of ground systems and mission operations capabilities. His specific responsibilities are to:

(a) Participate in the design of the mission to aid in optimizing flight-ground trade-offs, and ensures consistency of Project plans and TDS planned capabilities.

(b) Negotiate the spacecraft requirements for TDS support. Negotiate the TDS support plans and their commitment. Document the requirements, commitments, and support plans.

(d) Represent the Project when required in the DSN change control process.

(e) Monitor the proper planning and execution of TDS operations in support of the mission.

(f) Ensure that all the necessary and proper steps are taken in the near-Earth portion of the mission to provide a high probability of a successful initial DSN acquisition. Monitor near-Earth tracking and data acquisition support planning and conduct those studies necessary to independently assess the adequacy of such planning.

8. Launch Vehicle System (LVS) Manager

The VRM Launch Vehicle is the Space Shuttle with the Centaur G upperstage. The interface between the VRM Project and all elements of the LVS is managed by LeRC Shuttle/Centaur Project Manager.

Specifically, the LeRC Shuttle/Centaur Project Manager is responsible for:

(a) Management, coordination, and scheduling.

(b) All hardware interfaces - mechanical, electrical, and environmental requirements.

(d) Planning of near-Earth phase tracking and data acquisition.

(e) Coordination of all mission design effort including vehicle performance, trajectory design, and guidance and control considerations.

5-7 9. Staff Positions a •. Project Safety Engineer 0 The Flight Projects Staff Engineer for Safety is accountable to the JPL Assistant Laboratory Director for Flight Projects for carrying out his assigned responsibilities. He acts as a Project Staff Specialist for the Project and is an ex-officio member of Project Review Boards. He provides safety support to the Project Office, prepares the Project Safety Plan for approval by the Project Manager, and is a safety consultant as required throughout the life of the Project. He is functionally responsible to the Project Manager. He integrates safety requirements placed on the Project by JPL as an institution, JSC and KSC. He provides these integrated requirements to the Spacecraft and Radar System Manager for implementation. He and the System Managers cochair the Project Safety Steering Committee which is responsible for hazard analyses and safety v~rification.

h. Project R&QA Manager

The Project R&QA Manager is administratively assigned to the JPL Quality Assurance and Reliability Office and is functionally responsible to the Project Manager. Responsibilities include monitoring and reviewing the quality and reliability aspects of design, development, fabrication, test, and mission operations at JPL; and representing the Project Manager in Quality Assurance and Reliability matters in liaison with other agencies supporting the Project and with NASA.

c. Project Procurement Representatives

The Project Procurement Representatives are administratively assigned to the JPL Procurement Division, but are functionally responsible to the Project Manager. Their responsibilities include the negotiation and surveillance of project procurement activities at JPL, including second tier subcontractors. Procurement activity relating to major subcontracts may be assigned to the Flight and E&TA Projects Procurement Section which is then delegated responsibility for the negotiation and administration of these con tracts. The Procurement Support Section of the Procurement Division provides c:ost analysis and contract analysis support for these major contracts; and also provides surveillance through analysis of NASA Form 533 reports of participating NASA Center contractors and other reports provided by the NASA Centers, as appropriate.

d. The Project Financial Manager

The Financial Manager is administratively assigned to the Financial and Property Management Division but is functionally responsible to the Project Manager for project-level financial and manpower planning, control, and reporting, with specific responsibilities to:

(l) Prepare the financial inputs to the monthly Project Manage rnent Report for review and approval, and prepare the VRM Project Operating Plan (POP) inputs.

5-8 630-1

(2) Analyze financial and manpower plans vis-a-vis performance, and review this analysis and his recommendations with the Project Manager on a routine basis. He may use any reason able performance measuring system or technique approved by his Division management.

(3) Interface with financial management personnel at NASA Head quarters when so assigned by the Project Manager.

(4) Review the VRM POP guidelines from NASA and from the JPL Financial and Property Management Division and initiate the activities required to. support the JPL POP submission.

(5) Establish and maintain the VRM Project Work Breakdown Structure.

(6) Ensure that the Project Manager and the Systems Managers receive appropriate summary status reports and supportive detail reports.

(7) Ensure that the Project Manager is kept informed at all times within the scope of these activities.

(8) Complete work force plans for the Project and coordinate these plans with flight projects.

(9) Review reports received from the system contractors and the JPL subcontract cost analyst and coordinate his findings in these reports with the Spacecraft System and Radar System Managers.

e. Flight Operations Support Manager

The Flight Operations Support Manager (FOSM) represents the Flight Projects Support Office (FPSO) to the Venus Radar Mapper Project. He reports administratively to the Manager of the FPSO. He reports functionally to the Mission Operations System Manager for all FPSO matters in support of the VRM project. His specific responsibilities are to:

(l) Act as the focal point for all SFOC technical matters to the flight project and provide technical support as required.

(2) Coordinate the preparation of the FPSO commitment documents in response to project requirements.

(3) Represent current and planned capabilities of the SFOC to the VRM Project:

(a) Participate in project sponsored data system design activities to assure that project requirements are met and SFOC constraints are not violated.

5-9 (b) Prepare functional requirements of the SFOC for inclusion in the VRM MOS Design Book.

(4) Identify to the FPSO and MOS Managers those project requirements and schedules which fall outside current or planned capabilities.

(5) Monitor the generation of documentation, including requirements, design, implementation plan, user manuals, acceptance plan, and integration plan.

(6) Coordinate the preparation, review, and approval of SFOC _ system development schedules for committed capabilities to support the project.

(7) Review the design of SFOC,system elements to determine that they meet project commitments.

(8) Monitor and review the development progress of SFOC system activities and project activities that interface with the SFOC.

(9) Recommend to management solutions to resolve SFOC data system technical problems resulting from capability discrepancies and changes of project requirements.

10. Project Representatives

\~here appropriate, a Project Representative is assigned to each JPL Flight Project from each of the Technical Divisions. The Project Representa tive represents the Division Manager in conducting Project activities assigned to the Division and represents the Project in the Division. The Representative is responsible for the participation of the Division line organization, and the application of its specialized skills and knowledge, to achieve Project ·technical and reliability objectives. He sees that objectives are met within prescribed schedules, Project funds provided, and manpower allocated to the Division for Project work in accordance with approved operating plans.

Each Representative has specific responsibilities to:

(a) Understand Project guidelines and requirements, formulate tasks, and negotiate areas of effort to permit preparation of Divisional staffing and operating plans within the framework of the Division line organization.

(b) Plan and manage the implementation of those portions of tasks assigned to the Division, including budgetary, technical, schedule, work authorization, and reporting matters. Monitor and control the application of manpower on all Division accounts.

(c) Inform all concerned line management personnel in the Division about all aspects of the Project that will aid in carrying out line responsibilities.

5-10 (d) Ensure that the Division technical and scheduling commitments are fulfilled.

(e) Continually monitor all system contractor and in-house support, keep the concerned Project and Division management elements informed about potential and approved changes to plans and the status of activities as compared to plans, and promptly report to the Division Manager/Project Manager any problems (existing or potential) with the Division that could affect meeting Project commitments.

(f) Initiate bringing together appropriate elements of Project and Division managements whenever a situation could adversely affect attaining Project objectives, or where Division support to the Project is significantly redirected.

(g) Review and approve technical, schedule, and budgetary changes affecting Project efforts in the Division.

(h) Be responsive to Project management personnel or their staff by providing cost, resource, and risk estimates for requested technical options.

(i) Participate in contractor performance evaluation.

B. PROJECT MANAGEHENT

1. Project Staff

The Project Staff is comprised of:

Project Manager Project Scientist Science and Hission Design (S&MD) Manager Radar System Manager Spacecraft (S/C) System Manager Mission Operations System (MOS) Manager Tracking and Data Systems (TDS) Manager Launch Vehicle System Manager (LeRC) Financial Manager Safety Engineer Quality Assurance and Reliability Manager Flight Operations Support Manager

It is the point of final responsibility and authority for all Project activities and decisions.

2. Project Teams

The Project Design Team (PDT) is the top-level coordinating body which serves as the forum for addressing intersystem issues, developing options, and making recommendations for solutions. It is chaired by the S&MD Manager.

5-11 ··1.'~.

The PDT consists of the S&MD Manager, the Project Scientist, the Space craft System Manager, the Radar System Manager, the MOS Manager, the TDS I~ I Manager, the Mission Design Manager, the Spacecraft System Engineer~ and the Radar System Engineer.

The PDT is responsible for reviewing and assessing technical data, cost data, and mission risk associated with a major change to the Project baseline which affects more than one Project system. Upon reviewing this information, a recommendation to accept or reject the change is made to the Project Manager hased upon the majority opinion of the PDT members. The PDT will also address and resolve technical issues assigned by the Project Manager.

Many other teams subordinate to the PDT operate under the direction and control of the various System Managers. These include:

:'-1ission Design Team (MDT) respo,nsible to SMD Navigation Development Team (NDT) responsible to SMD MOS Design Team (MOSDT) responsible to MOS Manager S/C Design Team (MMA) responsible to S/C System Manager Radar Design Team (HAC) responsible to Radar System Manager. Radar Processing Team (RDPT) responsible to Radar System Manager Spacecraft Contract Administration Team (S/C CAT) Radar Contract Administration Team (R CAT)

3. Project Science Group (PSG)

Chaired by the Project Scientist and cochaired by the Program Scientist, the Project Science Group (PSG) is responsible to the Project and formulates science policy for the Project. In addition to the Radar PI and two Gravity Pis, it includes several members of the Radar Investigation Group (RADIG). ThePSG is an important aspect of the science structure. With the Radar Investigation representing a wide variety of interests, it is necessary to have the guidance and counsel of a group of experienced scientists who represent the various scientific interests of the larger planetary community \vho will use the data. The PSG serves this function. It also acts as a forum for establishing science and data management plans. Although the PSG is largely comprised of SAR and altimeter investigators, it will not supplant the PI roles, but will provide a broader perspective and confirmation of PI and Llroject recommendations for implementing the science experiments. The Project Scientist will ensure that any differences of opinion among the various interests represented by the PSG are thoroughly debated and a fair and clear representation of the issues is provided to the ·Project Manager for his decision.

Thus, the PSG acts for science as the legislative body, formulating policy. The Radar Investigation Group and the Gravity Investigation Group under their respective Pis manage and execute the science plans, and the Project Manager adjudicates according to established policy, when necessary.

I)Is are responsible to the Project and, in addition to being PSG members, are responsible for the investigation requirements and data management plans as well as participate extensively in the investigation implementation.

5-12 ul Some of the science areas for which the Project assumes control and responsibility are:

(a) Funding allocation and contracting for all investigators (Pis, CO-Is, PSG members, and Guest Investigators).

(b) All first-order data products. This includes first-order reduction of altimeter data.

Investigator support up to launch will be limited to what is required by the Project to design and prepare for the mission. During the mission, those investigations that were selected and remain relevant will be supported. It is clear.that not all investigations will require the same funding.

The PSG will approve writing assignments and coordinate the reports anj journal articles to protect the interests of all the investigators. The PSG will also approve and administer the science data aspects of the Project Data Management Plan and provide plans for timely release of the mission data to the news media (via press release support, press conferences, etc.) and to the science community. The Project Science budget will provide funds for science analysis activities during the mission and will be administered by the Science~ ,.,nd Mission Design Manager. The funding levels will be determined during FY 1984.

The members of the PSG, the Radar Investigation Group (RADIG), and the Gravity Investigation Group are: ~""'"'·\ '- PSG MEMBERS

Dr. Georges Balmino Dr. Merton Davies Dr. R. Keith Raney Dr. R. Stephen Saunders, Project Scientist, Chairman Dr. Laurence A. Soderblom Mr. Ray Stanley Dr. G. Leonard Tyler Dr. Michel Lefebvre Dr. William L. Sjogren Dr. Charles Elachi Dr. James W. Head, III Dr. Harold Masursky Dr. Gordon H. Pettengill Dr. R. J. Phillips Hr. Joseph M. Boyce, Program Scientist, Cochairman

5-13 630""1

RADAR INVESTIGATION GROUP MEMBERS

Dr. Raymond Arvidson Dr. Victor Baker Dr. Joseph H. Binsack Mr. Joe Boyce Dr. Donald B. Campbell Dr. Merton E. Davies Dr. Charles Elachi Dr. John Guest Dr. James W. Head, III Dr. William M. Kaula Dr. Kurt L. Lambeck Dr. Franz W. Leberl Dr. Harold MacDonald Dr. Harold Masursky Dr. D. P. McKenzie Dr. Barry E. Parsons Dr. Gordon Pettengill, PI Dr. Roger Phillips Dr. R. Keith Raney Dr. R. Stephen Saunders Dr. Gerald Shaber Dr. Laurence A. Soderblom Dr. Sean C. Solomon Mr. Ray Stanley Dr. Manik Talwani Dr. G. Leonard Tyler Dr. John Wood

GRAVITY INVESTIGATION GROUP MEMBERS

Dr. Mohan Ananda Dr. Georges Balmino Dr. Nicole Borderies Dr. Michel Lefebvre, PI Dr. B. Moynot Dr. William L. Sjogren, PI

5-14 c 4. Spacecraft System Management There are two major elements of the spacecraft system to be managed. They are the System Contract and the JPL Resources to monitor, support, and manage it.

a. Spacecraft System Contract Management

The Spacecraft System Manager is the designated manager of the system contract. He is administratively supported by a dedicated and colocated Contract Negotiator from the JPL Procurement Division. Technical support is provided by the JPL Technical Divisions. The contractor's performance is monitored and managed by a Contract Management Team. The team is led by the Spacecraft System Manager and consists of the Contract Negotiator and Flight Project Representatives from the JPL Technical Divisions. The Division representatives are supported by Work Unit Managers within the Divisions.

The contractor's work is divided into 11 work units along technical discipline lines and a program management work unit. This division is the second level of the contractor's work breakdown structure (WBS). The contractor will report monthly technical and schedule progress and financial status, including NASA Form 533Q at this level. Monthly schedule reporting will include the status of over 1200 individual tasks and milestones during the contract. The contractor also provides monthly reports of earned value. which is based on his cost and schedule management systems. Major problems or status changes will be reported weekly by TWX.

The JPL Work Unit Managers are responsible for maintaining a continual awareness of, and reporting on, the status of their work unit. In addition, a monthly management review will be conducted by the JPL Contract Management Team at the contractor's facility. Simultaneous meetings to assess the status of each work unit will be conducted during the first day, and a formal review of the distillate from these work unit meetings will be conducted on the second day.

The contract is of an award fee type and contains strong technical and schedule motivators and cost incentives. Formal performance evaluations and contractor debriefings will be conducted by JPL each six months. A less formal midterm award fee meeting will be held to apprise the contractor of JPL concerns as they may affect the evaluation for that period.

b. Management of JPL In-House Resources

The Spacecraft System Manager is also responsible for technically managing the JPL resources used to support and manage the system contract. These JPL resources consist of the Contract Monitoring Team and the Work Unit Managers and support personnel within the Technical Divisions. In several cases the Division representative is also a Work Unit Manager. JPL work is planned and monitored using the JPL System for Resource Management. Plans are entered into the system with Cost Estimate Input Sheets, changed through Resources Allocation Change Requests, and actual expenditures are c reported through Resources Status Reports and Summaries. Coordination of the

5-15 JPL. effort is accomplished through biweekly Contract Monitoring Team meetings at which progress is discussed, plans are made, and action items are established and reviewed.

5. Radar System Management

Effort accomplished under the Radar System includes (a) in-house effort for the development of the Radar Data Processing Subsystem (RDPS) and radar system engineering and (b) contracted effort for the development of the radar sensor subsystem, altimeter antenna, support equipment, system analysis, and the processor input unit for the RDPS. This section describes the organization and management tools planned to be used in accomplishing the Radar System effort.

a. In-house Tasks

The Radar System engineering'is the responsibility of the Radar Science and Engineering Section at JPL. The Radar System Engineer holds weekly design meetings with the support engineers. In addition, daily interaction occurs between most of the group members. Status meetings are held monthly with the technical section management and the Radar System Manager.

Effort is planned and monitored using work schedules in combination with a continuously updated action item list. Cost planning is done using the JPL System for Resources Management (SRM), and actuals are monitored using the SRM Resources Status Report and weekly/monthly work hours distribution report.

The VRM RDPS development includes the processor input unit done by the ~ Radar System Contractor, the modifications/additions to the Advanced Digital SAR Processor (ADSP) hardware and software and for the radar correlation, and the institutionally-funded Multimission Image Processing Laboratory (MIPL) used for production of the Mosaicked Image Data Records and Global Topography Data Records. The ADSP is the responsibility of the Radar Science and Engineering Section, and the MIPL is the responsibility of the Image· Processing Applications and Development Section. The task leader for all of the VRM development effort of the RDPS is in the Radar Science and Engineering Section. The management techniques used for the radar system engineering apply also to the RDPS.

b. Radar System Contract Monitoring

Contract technical management is the responsibility of the Radar System Manager in the Project office and will be accomplished using a contract monitoring team consisting of members from the Technical Divisions, Quality Assurance and Reliability Office, and Financial and Property Management Division. Contract administration is provided by the Procurement Division.

The contract monitoring key members are:

(1) Contract Technical Manager (2) Contract Negoti~tor (3) Radar Sensor Work Unit Manager

5-16 .,.

( 4) Altimeter Antenna Work Unit Manager ~5) System Analysis Work Unit Manager (Radar System Engineer) (6) Quality Assurance Work Unit Managers (7) Reliability Work Unit Manager (8) Environmental Requirement Engineer (9) Mechanical/Thermal Task Leader (10) Quality Assurance Resident ( 11) Engineering Residents (12) Financial Analyst

This monitoring team will interact with the contractor on a regular basis (as often as daily) for monltoring purposes, assistance in technical direction, and guidance of the contractor effort. The interaction will be accomplished both informally and formally by, for example, participation in the contractor Parts, Material and Process Review Board, the Material Review Board, monthly status meetings, and formal program reviews. '

The contract monitoring team will meet on a regular basis (nominally biweekly) with the Radar System Manager for status reporting and coordination. Items requiring immediate attention will be addressed as they occur.

To a.id the monitoring team, the contractor is required to submit monthly status reports, monthly financial reports including Program Management System (PMS) analysis and NASA 533 financial reports, monthly schedule updates, and engineering documentation as issued.

The contractor has been tasked to perform the PMS analysis for the Radar System Contract. This analysis will derive the earned value of work completed and provide cost and schedule variance analysis when the defined thresholds are exceeded for a given report item. The JPL financial analyst will perform detailed audits to ensure the PMS analysis is valid.

The contractor's technical and management performance is evaluated semi yearly for award fee purposes. The evaluators consist of members from the monitoring team and the contract negotiator. Inputs from the evaluation then go to an evaluation committee that prepares an evaluation report and scoring for consideration by the contractor after completion of each evaluation.

6. Interface Control

The major system interfaces are controlled by Interface Requirement Documents (IRDs). Management of the launch vehicle interface is described in Section V.B.7. The spacecraft-radar interface is managed within the spacecraft contract using an interface working group having members from JPL, Martin, and Hughes. The MOS interface is controlled by separate IRDs with the spacecraft and radar. The Tracking and Data System interface is handled in the conventional manner - the Project will issue the Support Instrumentation Requirement Document (SIRD) and the TDS will respond with the NASA Support Plan (NSP).

5-17 630=1

7. Launch Vehicle Interface

a. VRM to Centaur G Integration

To implement the integration of VRM with the Centaur G, two jointly-chaired panels will be established. The Panels will consist of representatives of: the VRM Project (JPL and MMC), the Shuttle/Centaur Project (LERC, Analex, and GDC), NASA Headquarters, and NSTS (JSC, KSC and supporting contractors). The two panels are the Mission Integration Panel (MIP) and the Mission Design Panel (MDP).

1) Mission Integration Panel (MIP). The VRM MIP is responsible for all hardware and operations related interfaces between the VRM Project and the Shuttle/Centaur/Space Transportation System. In discharging this responsibility, the Panel develops the requirements for and oversees the implementation of the following areas:

Mechanical and electrical design Environmental requirements and design criteria STS safety requirements Development and interface tests Interface schedules

The MIP activities are documented in the VRM/Centaur/STS Requirements Document (RD) the VRM/Centaur Interface Planning and Schedule Document (IPSD) the VRM/Centaur Electrical Interface Control Drawing (EICD), and the VRM/Centaur Mechanical Interface Control Drawing (MICD). JPL, with MMC support, produces the RD and maintains configuration control once it is released. LERC, with GDC support·, performs the same function for the other three documents.

2) Mission Design Panel (MDP). The purpose of the MDP is to interchange mission, spacecraft, and launch vehicle system technical information for the development and analyses of launch vehicle performance, launch period, trajectories, and guidance and control for the VRM mission. MDP responsibilities include:

(a) Identifying MDP interface documentation requirements.

(~) Identifying and delineating all necessary tasks relative to launch vehicle performance, trajectory and guidance analyses, and support of launch vehicle system flight safety analyses.

b. VRM/Centaur to NSTS Integration

Lewis Research Center (LeRC) is responsible for integration of Centaur-borne payloads into the National Space Transportation System (NSTS). The VRM Spacecraft together with the Centaur (with their associted airborne support equipment) comprise a cargo element in the Space Shuttle System.

5-18 Integration of this cargo element with the NSTS is accomplished through the efforts of Working Groups jointly chaired by representatives of LeRC and JSC or KSC. The- primary Working Group is the Integration Management Working Group which is cochaired by representatives of the LeRC Shuttle/Centaur Project Office and the JSC Payload Integration Office. The supporting Working Groups are:

\\forking Group Cochair

Structural/Mechanical LeRC/JSC Therrital LeRC/JSC Avionics LeRC/JSC Flight Operations LeRC/JSC Flight Design LeRC/JSC Ground Operations LeRC/KSC

Each Working Group is organized to provide a means for interchange between the flight Project, the Centaur, the NST and operational support elements with assurance that the physical and functional VRM Project/Centaur/NSTS integration and interface requirements are defined, analyzed, and accomplished on mutually acceptable schedules and with satisfactory resolution. JPL and MMC, as members of the above-named Working Groups, participate fully in all their activities.

The formal VRM to NSTS technical and programmatic requirements are defined in a jointly prepared LeRC/JSC document entitled "Payload Integration Plan (PIP), STS and VRM Project." The PIP is the controlling document between the VRM Centaur Cargo Element (VRM CCE) and the NSTS, and as such, it defines management roles and responsibilities, defines technical integration require ments, defines integration tasks, and establishes a control schedule for all major integration activities. The technical integration requirements of the VRM Project are obtained from the VRM/Centaur/STS Requirements Document. Detail integration requirements are further delineated in annexces to the PIP. The PIP and its annexes are produced and controlled by JSC and KSC, as appropriate.

C. PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION

VRM will be implemented by contracting with Martin and Hughes for the spacecraft and radar, respectively. Their scopes of work are defined in Section VI.B and VI.C. JPL is responsible for the Project management, mission design including navigation, mission operations, management of the two system contracts and for furnishing a large amount of hardware and software to Martin for use in the spacecraft system.

1, Constraints

(a) VRM will be launched in the 1988 opportunity from the NSTS/Centaur G. c (b) A single spacecraft will be built and qualified.

5-19 630 1

(c) Class A implementation is required. Any deviations require full exposure and buy-off. No single-point failures shall result in I~ loss of more than 50% of the planned SAR or altimetry data. All j flight configuration will be fully qualified. All flight hardware will be either flight-acceptance tested or undergo protoflight qualification/acceptance testing.

(d) The mission design requires 34-m DSN coverage during cruise and 64-m DSN coverage during the mapping phase. When conflicts preclude use of the 64-m net, the 34-m net with arrayed antennas will be used and the mission design must provide acceptable (although degraded) images and/or coverage. The 34-m net (unarrayed) is acceptable for contingency operations due to spacecraft failures.

(e) VRM is required to maximize the use of the multimission FPSO capabilities.

(f) The design of the nominal mission shall not knowingly preclude an extended mission except for expendables. However, no consideration shall be given to extended mission capabilities if significant penalties are incurred in designing or implementing the nominal mission.

(g) The mission operations plan shall be compatible with one-shift per week staffing except for around-the-clock alarm monitoring.

2. Technical Division Responsibilities

The Technical Divisions support the Project in the implementation of the Project and the management and monitoring of the system contracts. In addition, certain Divisions are charged with specific deliverables for which they are held fully responsible as follows:

(a) Systems Division (31)

Mission Design Navigation Development and Operations Mission and Sequence Design and Operations Information System Design Gravity Experiment

(b) Telecommunication Science and Engineering Division (33)

Radar System Engineering Radar Data Processing Subsystem Design, Development and Operation X/S -~ Band'Downconverter TWTAs

Attitude Control Electronics Prototype Flight Unit

5-20 ..

Coordination of Propulsion and Power Subsystem GFE Acquisition and delivery of MSFC Thrusters Rocket Engine Module (REM) Te~ts

(d) Applied Mechanics Division (35)

Voyager bus Voyager HGA Dual shear plates AHSE

(e) Information Systems Division (36)

Command and Data Subsystem (CDS) CDS Support _Equipment CDS Breadboard

(f) Mission Support and Operations Division (37)

Mission Operations Ground System Development and Maintenance Mission Control Team - Planning, Software Development and Operation MOS Training

(g) Observational Systems Division (38)

Image Processor Development and Operation First Copies of Tape and Image Production Quick-look products

3. Flight Project Support Office (FPSO)

An agreement in principal has been documented with FPSO for the areas of support provided to VRM from FPSO funding. These areas include:

Navigation Monitoring and Control Command Telemetry Data Processing, Analysis and Display Image and Photo Processing Data Storage, Retrieval and Distribution Remote Data Base Access Telecommunications System Analysis Sequence Generation SFOC Test

4. Memoranda-of Agreement

/ ' VRM is predicated ori the use of hardware and software from several past and on-going Projects. Memoranda of Agreement have been signed or tirafted with the pertinent suppliers. Appendices B thru F are these MOAs.

5-21 /UO D. REPORTING

Formal and informal regular reporting to NASA and JPL is planned as follows:

NASA

(1) Monthly Project Management Reports (PMRs) covering status, problems, progress and schedule, manpower, and financial performance.

(2) Monthly Code EL informal reports covering accomplishments, liens and concerns, schedule performance, cost performance analysis, and reserve status.

(3) Monthly Administrator reports covering status and Project Manager's assessment of the Project.

(4) Quarterly Reviews are conducted by the Project for the purpose of providing NASA management with summary overviews of project activities. Each system manager will present a report on current configuration, effort completed, effort planned, schedule status, and issues and concerns. Resource matters will not be addressed at these reviews. Contractor personnel and science investigators will be invited to attend, as appropriate. Project Science Group (PSG) meetings will be scheduled to be contiguous with the Quarterly Reviews, when possible. A Quarterly Review will not be scheduled .if a major project review (such as SRR, PDR, CDR, or LRR) occurs in the same time period.

(5) Informal quarterly financial reports.

JPL

(1) Monthly DRD covering Project significant events, status, problems, and schedule and cost performance.

(2) Bi-Weekly verbal reporting to ALDFP.

E. DOCUMENTATION PLAN

The Project Documentation Plan (630-12) contains the document tree and descriptions of the scope and content of each document. All of the controlling technical documents are contained in this plan. The plan and the tree will be updated as necessary.

5-22

I f\ I F. STANDING REVIEW BOARD

A standing Review Board has been convened for all of the VRM Formal Reviews. It consists of:

E. Kane Casani, Chairman Arden L. Albee Frank Carr Richard R. Green Norman R. Haynes Raymond L. Heacock Richard L. Hartter Richard P. Laeser Lorey F. McGlinchey William S. Shipley Robertson Stevens

G. RESOURCES REPORTING

1. Program Operating Plan

Based upon guidelines specified by NASA Headquarters, the semiannual Program Operating Plan (POP) provides an accrual cost and obligation plan for JPL, with manpower for JPL, for use by NASA Headquarters where the data are integrated with POP submittals from each NASA Center. Actuals are provided to the nearest completed quarter, followed by planned estimates to the end of the Project. The resources estimates are provided by standard categories with subtotals, by fiscal year, for each of the various cost accrual/cost control centers of the Project, first for Development (from Pre-Project Start to Launch +30 days) and then for Operations (from Launch +30 days to End-of-Project).

2. Project Management Report (PMR)

Financial performance and staffing are reported monthly in the PMR. Formats and levels of reporting will be negotiated with the Program Manager.

3. NASA Form 533

NASA Form 533 will be submitted monthly for the two system contracts.

5-23 REFERENCES

S-1. Planning and Approval of Major Research and Development Projects, NMI 7121.1C, NASA, March 1977. 0

S-2. Guidelines for Project Planning, NHB 7121.4, NASA, July 1972.

S-3. Payload Integration Plan, Space Transportation System and VRM 1986 Project. Release date to be determined.

5-4. NASA Planetary Program Flight/Ground Data System Standards, Revision 5, NASA Headquarters, June 1977.

5-S •. VRM Review Plan. Release date to be determined.

~1-6. VRM Project Management Plan. Release date to be determined.

S-7. OSSA/OART Project Management Information and Control System (MICS). NHB 2340.2, NASA, November 1966.

5-8. Financial Management Reference Manual, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Revised January 1976.

5-9. Classification of NASA Space Transportation System (STS) Payloads, NM1 8010.1, NASA, September 26, 1979.

5-24

I D3. 630-1

SECTION VI.

PROCUREMENT STRATEGY

A. PROCUREMENT APPROACH

The V~I Project flight hardware will be acquired through separate system contracts for the Spacecraft System and the Radar System. The contractors were selected as the result of a phased competitive procurement process governed, as applicable, by NMI 7100.14A. Separate Source Evaluation Boards were utilized in accordance with JPL procedures. Martin Marietta Corporation, Denver Aero space Division, was selected for the Spacecraft System; and Hughes Aircraft Company, Space and Communications Group, was selected for the Radar System. Both contracts will be of the cost-plus-award fee type with strong incentives to meet the technical, schedule, administrative and cost objectives. The administrative management of the contracts will be conducted by VRM Project dedicated and colocated JPL Procurement Division personnel and the Spacecraft and Radar System Managers. Work unit and task managers in the JPL technical divisions will technically monitor the effort and coordinate it with the System Managers and the other Project elements. Specific contract management mechanisms are described in Sections V.B.4 and TBD 2, Spacecraft System Management and Radar System Management of this Plan. The scopes of the two system contracts are delineated in paragraphs B and C.

Science support contracts will be issued to the U.S. institutions employing the project science investigators delineate~ in Section V.B.3. Foreign investigators are supported by their own governments.

Separate contracts will be issued to the home institution of each PI supporting the Project. The contracts will be of the cost reimbursable type and most will be non-fee bearing. The administrative management of these contracts will be conducted by VRM project-dedicated Procurement Division personnel who are colocated in the VRM Project Office. The contractors will be required to use the NASA monthly and quarterly financial reporting tools (533 and 533Q) when the magnitude and duration of the contract so warrants. The Project Science Manager is the focal point for coordinating the technical and scientific aspects of these procurements with the Science and Mission Design Manager and the Project Scientist.

B. SPACECRAFT SYSTEM CONTRACT SCOPE OF WORK

The Martin Marietta Corporation is the Spacecraft System Full-Scale Development Contractor. Martin will be responsible for:

(1) design, development, fabrication, integration and test of the Spacecraft System,

(2) providing a qualified Spacecraft Flight System for launch with the STS, with all necessary provisioned spares and all required test and support equipment,

6-1 630"'1

(3) integration of the Spacecraft and the Radar Systems, t) (4) design, development, test, validation and acceptance of all software necessary to conduct the Spacecraft System development, including analysis, ground test software, flight software and mission operations software,

(5) support to the launch and launch operations,

(6) integration of the Spacecraft Flight System with the Mission Operations System (MOS), Space ~ransportation System (STS) and Tracking and Data System,

(7) support to the Project Science and Mission Design effort,

(8) support to the MOS during the design, development, test and training phases and

(9) providing the Spacecraft and Command Event Teams and supporting other functions of the MOS during launch, cruise and orbital operations phases.

C. RADAR SYSTEM CONTRACT SCOPE OF WORK

The Hughes Aircraft Company, Space and Communications Group is the Radar System Full Scale Development contractor. Hughes will be responsible for:

(1) providing the necessary system engineering to design, test, and document the Radar System,

(2) developing the sensor subsystem, altimeter antenna subsystem, associated support equipment, fixtures, tooling, and the Processor Input Unit (PIU) of the Radar Data Processing Subsystem (RDPS),

(3) generating the end-to-end Radar System performance estimates;

(4) providing the Radar Engineering Team for mission operations and supporting the Missions Operations System Design Team, Project Design Team, and Spacecraft integration and launch.

6-2

J {\:; 630-=-1

SECTION VII

PROJECT SCHEDULE

This section provides Levels 2 and 3 project schedules and other supporting schedules for the VRM Project. These schedules are current as of the date of this document. The Levels 2 and 3 schedules are maintained by the Project Office.

A. VRM PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE (LEVEL 2)

The VRM Project Implementation Level 2 Schedule is displayed in Figure 7-1. Refer to either the PMR or the Quarterly Review Material for the latest issue of this schedule.

B. VRM PROJECT SYSTEMS SCHEDULES (LEVEL 3)

VRM Project Systems Level 3 Schedules are displayed in the PMR or the Quarterly Review Material (see these documents for the latest schedules).

C. VRM PROJECT SUPPORTING SCHEDULES

Level 4 and sub-tier schedules will be generated as necessary to implement any project activity and to provide appropriate progress visibility. Refer to ·~\.. ____ . either the PMR or the Quarterly Review Material for the latest issues of these and other supporting schedules.

7-1 CY 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 MILESTONES 1 1 21 314 1J21314 lj2j3J4 1!21314 q 21314 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 1 21 3 14 PROJECT REVIEWS/EVENTS PAD'\7 l'\7 \1 LRR \IV L \! VOl \! \! SRR PCR EOM EOP SCIENCE AND MISSION DESIGN I REOTS EXPVLAN 'i REQW SCIENCE y__ 7PDMP MISSION DESIGN AND NAVIGATION f7 REOTS F PLANS\ 7\1 FMDR SPACECRAFT nEaTs-PDR CE_R SYSTEM DESIGN -~ SUBSYSTEM DESIGN p~ ~R

FAD. ASSY AND TEST .r7 INTEGRATION AND TEST •,_ SYSTEM TEST ~ RADAR I t t R~s--PDR SYSTEM DESIGN c~ I OM TMM lfM - r-7 ..-!-. SYSTEM ASSY AND TEST t- .J PDR CDR RADAR DATA PROCESSOR SUBSYS -....J D I MOS ' LAUNCH N TEST l MSA DEVELOPMENT AND DELIVERIES P!>-!f DESIGN F ~OSDR DEV ~A - TEST TEST AND OPERATIONS ' OPS D --TRAIN EXTERNAL INTERFACES RR ADSP OAST v NEPTUNE VGR '5l_ URANUS \7 GE GLL Ln., h CRUISE .0.. ...G. . MANEUVER JOI NOTES AOSP - ADV. DIGITAL SAR PROCESSOR GE - GANYMEDE ENCOUNTER POMP- PROJECT DATA CDR CRITICAL DESIGN REV. JOI - JUPITER ORBIT INSERTION MANAGEMENT PLAN OM - DEVELOPMENT MODEL L - lAUNCH PDR - PREL. DESIGN REV. EOM END OF MISSION MSA - MISSION SUPPORT AREA RR - READINESS REVIEW EOP END OF PROJECT . PAD - PROJECT AUTH. DOC. SRR - SYSTEMS REQTS. REV. FMDR. FMOSDR - FINAL SYSTEMS DESIGN REVIEWS PCR - PROJECT CONFIRMATION TMM - THERMAL/MASS MODEl FM - FLIGHT MODEL REVIEW VOl - VENUS ORBIT INSERTION

Figure 7-1. VRM Project Implementation Schedule (Level 2) C) 0 630=1

SECTION VIII

RESOURCES PLAN

A. PROJECT FUNDING AND REPORTING

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory is responsible for managing the Venus RAdar Mapper Project at a cost of $294,600,000. This total includes Project-held reserves and is expressed in real year dollars. Tables show the Project total spread by fiscal year (Table 8-1) and the conventional breakdown into Development (Table 8-2) and Operations (Table 8-3). The Project Financial Manager will maintain current estimates of cost at completion and will report the fiscal status, performance and manpower estimates and status of the Project reserves in the PMR. Project resources reporting includes also the Program Operating Plan (POP) and special analyses and reports as requested. The PMR and the POP were described in Section V.

B. PROJECT MANAGEMENT RESERVE

A Project management reserve will be maintained and controlled by the Project Manager. Allocation and use will be reported in the PMR.

C. ALLOWANCE FOR PROGRM1 ADJUSTMENT

An Allowance for Program Adjustment (APA) is held by NASA Headquarters and is used basically to fund Headquarters-directed changes and cost increases outside JPL cognizance.

D. RESOURCES ESTIMATES

The Vfu~ Project planning estimates by fiscal year are listed in Table 8-1 through 8-5. Tables 8-1, 8-2, and 8-3 provide obligation estimates, and Tables 8-4 and 8-5 provide manpower estimates.

8-1 630 ... 1

Table 8-1. VRM Project (UPN 844-00) Total Obligations Planning Estimate Summary (Dollars in Real Year Millions) () __ ,

Fiscal Year 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 Total

Total Development (To 28.7 91.7 92.4 41.3 13.8 267.9 Launch + 30 Days)

Mission Ops and Data 9. 2 17.5 26.7 Analysis (From Launch + 30 Days)

Total Project Obligations 28.7 91. 7 92.4 41.3 23.0 17.5 294.6

JPL NOA 28.7 91.7 92.4 41.3 23.0 17.5 294.6

8-2 630""1

Table 8-2. VRM Project (UPN 844-00) Development Obligation (""\ Planning Estimate (Dollars in Real Year Millions) '---

1988 Fiscal Year 1984 1985 1986 1987 To Launch Total + 30 days

Project Management 1. 0 12.4 13.3 7. 9 2.5 37.1

Science and Mission Design 1.6 1.7 1.5 1.8 2.3 8. 9

Radar 11.2 20.4 22.0 6.2 1.1 60.9

Spacecraft 14.5 55.4 50.7 20.2 3.6 144.4

Mission Operations 0.4 1.8 4.9 5.2 4.3 16.6

Total Development Obligations 28.7 91. 7 92.4 41.3 13.8 267.9

JPL NOA 28.7 91.7 92.4 41.3 13.8 267.9

8-3 I I 0 630~1

Table 8-3. VRM Project (UPN 889-59) Operations Obligation Planning Estimate (Dollars in Real Year Millions)

1988 From Launch Fiscal Year + 30 days 1989 Total

Total Operations Obligations 9.2 17.5 26.7

JPL NOA 9.2 17.5 26.7

Table 8-4. VRM Project (UPN 844-00) Development In-House Workforce Planning Estimates

1988 Fiscal Year 1984 1985 1986 1987 To Launch + 30 days WY SC WY SC WY SC WY SC WY SC

JPL 73.0. 3.0 100.0 1.0 102.0 0.0 93.0 0.0 41.0 0.0

Notes: WY- In-House JPL Workyears.

SC - In-House Support Contractor Workyears.

8-4

J II 630~1

Table 8-5. VRM Project (UPN 889-59) Operations In-House Workforce Planning Estimate

1988 From Fiscal Year Launch 1989 +30 days WY SC WY SC

JPL 28.0 o. 0 38.0 1.0

Notes: WY - In-House JPL Workyears.

SC - In-House Support Contractor Workyears.

8-5 630""1

SECTION IX

MANAGEMENT REVIEW

A. PROGRAM REVIEWS

Program reviews are reviews of the Project by NASA Headquarters. These will generally be scheduled to occur when approval to proceed is required, when important events have occurred, when significant scheduled events are about to occur, and to keep the Associate Administrator for Space Science and Applications advised of Project status. Program reviews are categorized as Level 1.

B. PROJECT REQUIREMENTS

The VRM Project requires both formal and informal reviews and reports from and attendance by elements of the Project on a routine basis which may vary from monthly to semi-annually.

The Project requires formal, structured, written reports from all elements of the Project on a monthly basis to support submittal of the PMR.

C. THE PROJECT REVIEW PLAN

Major reviews to be accomplished are: System Requirements Review Project Confirmation Review Spacecraft and Radar Preliminary Design Reviews Spacecraft and Radar Critical Design Reviews Mission Design Review MOS Design Revievl MOS Readiness Revie'11 Spacecraft Pre-ship Review Launch Readiness Review Science Operations Review

The requirements for and details of Project reviews and reports are provided in Ref. 9-1. This document defines the requirements and mechanics for formal reviews to be conducted by the VRM Project.

It identifies the required review or report, level, objectives, agenda, and schedule; membership duties, and responsibilities of the Review Board and Chairman; Review Board reports; and disposition of action items. It also levies requirements on the Project Office and contractors for the generation of review plans for the lower level reviews.

To a lesser extent, details are also provided for Project informal reviews and reports, and for the Project-related LVS reviews. r.... __ ....

9-1 ) \;, REFERENCE ~ . ) 9-1. VRM Review Plan, PD 630-XXX, JPL, to be issued.

9-2 l \U- 630 ... 1

SECTION X

CONTROLLED ITEMS

Controlled items are those specified items requ1r1ng approval or concur rence at NASA senior management level before the item can either be established or changed. For the VRM Project, controlled items are in accord with the Solar System Exploration Program Approval Document (PAD) (Ref. 10-1), the VR}1 PAD (Ref •. 10-2), and as indicated in this section.

A. APPROVAL AUTHORITY

NASA senior management personnel and the controlled items assigned to each are as follows:

(1) The Administrator will control or approve all items reserved for him by N}1I 7100.14A, Major System Acquisitions, April 1978:

(a) Approval of each mission need to be fulfilled, its relative priority in NASA, and the general magnitude of resources that may be used for that purpose.

(b) Selection of system design ~oncepts to be advanced for further exploration or approval to proceed with development of a single system concept. ~I (c) Reaffirmation of the mission need and approval to proceed with full-scale development of a major system.

(d) Where applicable, reaffirmation of the mission need and approval to proceed with full production of a major system.

(2) The Deputy Administrator will approve:

(a) Program and project objectives and technical plans, and any ~ignificant change thereto.

(b) Flight mission objectives, the number of flight missions, the number of flight and prototype spacecraft and major items of hardware, the type of launch vehicle to be utilized, and any change thereto.

(d) The total Solar System Exploration program.funding for each fiscal year, and increases thereto. He will also approve any change in a current or prior year resource allocation of the VR}l Project which would require an increase in any future year resource allocation, or which would result in a change in total estimated cost-at-completion.

10-1 630""1

(e) Interagency or International Agreements for the VRM Project, and any changes thereto.

(f) Field Center assignments for the VRM Project.

(3) The Associate Administrator for Space Science and Applications will approve:

(a) Significant deviations at participating NASA Centers in the level of in-house manpower devoted to the Solar System Exploration program, or the addition of responsibility for work in-house previously planned for out-of-house performance.

(b) Science selection, confirmation, and any change thereto.

(i) Each principal investigator and co-investigator~ (ii) Each member of the Project Science Group. (iii) Each guest investigator.

(d) Changes in the acquisition plan.

(e) Changes in the fiscal year funding for the VRM Program, subject to actions of the Deputy Administrator noted above.

(f) Establishing Level 1 milestones for the VRN Project. The authority for approving changes thereto has been delegated to the VRN Program Hanager.

(g) The target cost funding available to JPL for implementation of the VRN Project. Approval authority for changes to the JPL target cost by allocation from the Headquarters' reserve or Allowance for Program Adjustment (APA) has been delegated to the VRM Program ~la:nager.

(h) The requirements of the VRN Project for Tracking and Data Systems support, and any significant changes thereto.

(4) The Associate Administrator for Space Tracking and Data Systems will approve:

(a) Tracking and Data Systems (TDS) support to the VRN Project, and any significant changes thereto caused by changes either in Project requirements or in the composite missions support by the TDS.

B. CONTROLLED HILESTONES

The following schedule milestones are designated as controlled. It is the responsibility of the Project Nanager to constantly assess the probability of meeting these milestones and to communicate his assessment to the Program 0

10-2

II I ~ 630"'1

Manager. Requests for changes shall be formally submitted in writing by the Project Manager to the Program Manager with full justifications and impact explanations.

(1) The following milestones have been selected for inclusion in the VRM PAD:

Event Calendar Year

System Requirement Review 1Q 1984 Project Confirmation Review 4Q 1984 System Prelim. Design Review 4Q 1984 System Critical Design Review 4Q 1985 Launch Readiness Review 1Q 1988

(2) The following additional milestones are designated controlled because of their importance to the mission:

Event Calendar Year

Spacecraft System PDR 4Q 1984 Radar System PDR 4Q 1984 Spacecraft Subsystem PDR 2Q 1985 Radar Data Proc. PDR 2Q 1985 Prelim. MOS Design Review 2Q 1985 Issue Science Experiment Plan 3Q 1985 Spacecraft System CDR 4Q 1985 Radar System CDR 4Q 1985 Issue SIRD 4Q 1985 Spacecraft Subsystem CDR 1Q 1986 Final MOS Design Review 1Q 1986 Issue Project Data Mgmt. Plan 1Q 1986 Final Mission Design Review 1Q 1986 Ship Radar DM to Denver 2Q 1986 Radar Data Proc. CDR 2Q 1986 Begin Spacecraft Integ. & Test 1Q 1987 Ship Radar TMM to Denver 1Q 1987 Ship Radar FM to Denver 2Q 1987 Deliver PIU to JPL 2Q 1987 MOS Test Readiness Review 2Q 1987 Deliver RDPS to MOS 4Q 1987 MOS Flight Readiness Review 1Q 1988 Science Operations Review 3Q 1988

10-3

\ \ ~ 630=1

SECTION XI

~· RELIABILITY ASSURANCE, QUALITY ASSURANCE AND SAFETY

A. RELIABILITY AND QUALITY ASSURANCE (R&QA)

The VRM Project maintains surveillance over the reliability and quality of each Project element. The VRM Project will utilize appropriate provisions from References 11-1 through 11-6 in selecting the requirements for and implementation of reliability and quality assurance programs. The program consists of the reliability and quality ass~rance actions of each type of Project element (and their contractors and suppliers) supporting the Project except the LVS, TDS, and SFOC. The participating NASA Centers establish and manage reliability and quality assurance programs both internally and at their contractors.

1. Reliability Assurance Program

The tasks, activities, and responsibilities will include cost/risk effective implementation of appropriate provisions of Reference 11-1 and the consideration of Project-unique conditions and requirements. Required activities in the Project reliability assurance program will include, but are· not limited to: ·

(a) A technical review program including coverage of designs, ·hardware, documentation, test plans and results, software design and verification, mission readiness, and flight operations.

(b) Reliability evaluations, the goals of which are the identi fication of sources of unreliability, the provision of a basis for developing appropriate corrective action, and the establishment of criteria for distribution of reliability resources. Emphasis is placed on accomplishing such reliability actions very early in the design/development phase for meaningful effectiveness.

(c) Implementation of a program for timely and comprehensive problen/failure reporting analysis, corrective action, and verification.

(d) Implementation (by contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers of parts) of materials and packaging programs for the purpose of failure prevention through application of these disciplines.

(e) Reliability indoctrination and training where such activity is addressed to the communication of approaches to those problems, factors, and constraints that are unique to VRM.

(f) Effective consideration of human factors in designs, procedures, documentation, software, and operations to ensure that opportunities for errors from ambiguities, confusion, misinterpretation or omissions are precluded.

11-1 630""1

(g) Monitoring of integrated test planning and its implementation, from parts and materials through component, subsystem, system, and mission levels of test activity.

(h) Monitoring of qualification test plans and environment through component, subsystem, and system-level test activities.

(i) Auditing the activities of each contractor, subcontractor and supplier to assure compliance.

(j) Identify all single-point failures, using FMEA techniques, to assure that the requirements of the Project single-point failures policy are satisfied for both hardware and software.

(k) Participate in the preparat~on of the Software Management Plan per the provisions of keference 11-5.

2. Quality Assurance Program

A Project-level Quality Assurance (QA) Program for all phases of the VRM Project will be instituted to provide QA activities to assist in achieving mission successs.

The ~A Program will cover, on a cost/risk effectiveness basis, all hardware and software as well as the associated Support Equipment (SE), Mission-Dependent Equipment (t-IDE) and HOS hardware and software. The basic elements of the ~A program devised for the control of VR}l hardware and software will be compatible with the applicable provisions of Reference 11-2. The program shall include, but is not limited to, the following:

(a) Establish quality assurance program requirements.

(b) Review and monitor contractor, subcontractor and supplier procurement controls.

(d) Review and monitor workmanship specifications.

(e) Participate in the inspection program, including source, receiving, in-house, and prelaunch activities.

(f) Participate in nonconforming materials control, including a formal material review board procedure.

(g) Review and monitor process, material and fabrication specifications of all hardware.

(h) Review and monitor procedures for quality certification of all hardware and software.

(i) Review and monitor procedures for handling, shipping, and storage of flight hardware and SE.

11-2 (j) Review and monitor procedures for calibration and the resulting calibration status documentation of test and support equipment.

(k) Review and verify hardware configuration management control.

The Quality Assurance Program will be supported by timely and effective documentation of activities, results and status.

3. Implementation of R&QA Programs

R&QA requirements for the Spacecraft and Radar Systems and the VRM Mission Operations System, including the VRM Ground Data System, are based on the R&QA procedures and practices of JPL as developed for prior planetary exploration projects conducted in either the in-house subsystem mode or contractor mode.

R&QA Project documents, which define the implementation of the appropriate provisions of References 11-1 through 11-6 will be developed. In a similar manner, each JPL contractor and supplier will be required to develop R&QA plans to meet Project requirements.

B. SAFETY PROGRAN

1. Safety Program Requirements

~\ The VRM Safety Program will require activities to assure that \_ •• I potential hazards to either equipment or personnel associated with the Project are eliminated or controlled. The Program is applicable to each element of the Project, including systems, contractors, subcontractors and suppliers (including science support).

VRM Project Safety requirements will be defined in accordance with References 11-7 through 11-18. The major safety requirements include, but are not limited to:

(a) A Project Safety Plan shall be generated for approval by the VRM Project Manager during FY 1984. The plan shall define the safety requirements and responsibilities of each eleme~t of the Project including at least the major Project and contractor management and where feasible, subcontractor and supplier management. The Plan shall identify the various legal authorities and Codes inherent in the performance of the Safety Function.

(b) Safety status reviews shall be incorporated into each major review and report.

(d) Safety requirements shall be an integral part of every procurement; and commensurate with the particular letter of agreement or contract, a safety plan and/or safety analysis

11-3 630-1

shall be required which must address interface safety aspects and interactions in addition to the direct product safety concerns.

(e) In compliance with References 11-9 and 11-15, the Project Safety Plan will incorporate Reference 11-13 as a guide, and will require that fracture control techniques be employed in the design and control of all structure and bracketry that could result in Shuttle catastrophic events. In addition, the Project Safety Plan will incorporate only the fracture mechanics portion of Reference 11-14 as a requirement for the VRH Project for evaluation of flight-weight pressure vessels.

(f) All safety concerns and analyses shall be subject to review by the VRM Project Safety Steering Committee.

The intent of these major safety requirements is to enable recognition and understanding of an unbroken chain of safety responsibility, in a strategic sense, as the flight hardware, ground test hardware, software and support equipment are designed, developed, tested, changed and either launched or used in any manner. As outlined in the Safety Plan, a Project Safety Steering Committee shall evaluate the hazards and make safety assessments of the VRM. ,

The VR}i Project safety organization at JPL and the Contractor Safety Steering Committee will foster understanding of operational responsibilities, and facilitate coordination between the safety organizations of the contractors, JPL and the participating NASA Centers. The existing safety organization of the contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers will be used when and where appropriate. ~ 2. Implementation of the Safety Program

a. Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Implementation of the Safety Program requirements for the Venus Radar Mapper Project, including the VRM Mission Operations System and the VRM Ground Data System, is based on the Safety procedures and practices of JPL as developed for prior planetary exploration projects and the NASA require ments and guidelines for the safety of the STS and related personnel. The safety requirements will be defined as stated previously. In a similar manner, each JPL contractor and supplier will be required to develop appropriate safety plans to meet Project requirements.

b. Hartin Marietta Corporation

The implementation of the Spacecraft System Safety Progran1 is the responsibility of the VID1 Spacecraft System Manager, subject to the periodic review of the JPL Flight Projects Systems Safety Office. The Space craft System Safety requirements will be based on the Safety procedures and practices of Martin Narietta and will include the safety requirements defined herein. The Spacecraft System Contractor shall prepare a System Safety Plan. The Plan will be reviewed and approved by the VRM Project Manager and the JPL (~ ' / Flight Projects Systems Safety Office prior to implementation by the contractor.

11-4 .. 630""1 ,. c. Hughes Aircraft Company

The implementation of the Radar System Safety Program .is the responsibility of. the VRM Radar System Manager, subject to the periodic review of the JPL Flight Projects Systems Safety Office. The Radar System Safety requirements will be based on the Safety procedures and practices of Hughes Aircraft Company and will include the safety requirements defined herein. The Radar System Contractor shall prepare a Radar System Safety Plan. The Plan will be reviewed and approved by the VRM Project Manager and the JPL Flight Projects Systems Safety Office prior to implementation by the Contractor.

d. NASA/Lewis Research Center

The implementation of the Shuttle/Centaur Safety Program is the responsibility of the Director, LeRC and of the Shuttle/Centaur Project Manager, LeRC. The Shuttle/Centaur Safety requirements are based on the procedures and practices of LeRC and make maximum use of the in-house safety procedures of the Shuttle/Centaur System Contractor •. Special documentation for the Venus Radar Mapper Project is not planned.

3. Primary and Shared Safety Responsibilities

Primary and shared safety responsibilities are assigned in Table 11-1 with the additional requirement that each interface safety concern shall be brought to the attention of the V~~ Project Manager to ensure timely resolution •

.~I ''\.,__ I Table 11-1. Safety Responsibilities

Martin Basis or Elements Hughes Marietta JPL LeRC JSC KSC

VRM Radar System X 0

VRM Spacecraft X 0

Shuttle/Centaur X

Centaur Cargo 0 0 0 X Element

Shuttle Orbiter X 0

Shuttle Orbiter/ 0 0 0 X Centaur Cargo Element and Launch Site Ground Ops

X - Primary Responsibility 0 - Shared Responsibility; implies a Safety Group or Committee

11-5 630col

REFERENCES

11-1. Reliability Program Provisions for Aeronautical and Space System Contractors, NASA, NHB 5300.4 (1A), April 1970.

11-2. Quality Program Provisions for Aeronautical and Space System Contractors, NASA, NHB 5300.4 (1B), April 1969.

11-3. Inspection Systems Provisions for Aeronautical and Space System Materials, Parts, Components, and Services, NASA, NHB 5300.4 (1C), July 1971.

11-4. Engineering Standards, JPL Laboratory Policy 4-12.

11-5. NASA Software Management Requirements for Flight Projects, NASA, NMI 2410.6, February 1979. '

11-6. Classification of NASA Space Transportation System (STS) Payloads, NASA, NMI 8010.1, September 26, 1979.

11-7. Flight Projects and Systems Safety, JPL, Laboratory Policy 13-4, December 1976.

11-8. Flight Projects Safety Guide and Requirements, JPL Internal Document 601-4, Revision B, April 1983.

11-9. Safety Policy and Requirements for Payloads Using the Space Transportation System, NASA, NHB 1700.7A, December 1980.

11-10. Basic Safety Requirements, NASA, NHB 1700.1 (V1), July 1969.

11-11. Safety Requirements for Spacecraft Mechanical Support Equipment, Detail Specifications for, JPL, ES 501492B, ECI 70434, December 1972.

11-12. Non-Flammable Material Requirements for Ground Support Electronic Equipment, Detail Specifications for, JPL, ES 511335A, December 1975.

11-13. Space Transportation System Payload Safety Guidelines Handbook, JSC 11123, Johnson Space Center, July 1976.

11-14. Aerospace Pressure Vessel Safety Standard, NASA, NSS-HP-1740.1, February 1974.

11-15. Space Transportaton System Payload Ground Safety Handbook, KHB 1700.7, November 1982.

11-16. Implementation Procedure for STS Payloads System Safety Requirements, JSC 13830A, May 1983.

11-17. Flammability, Odor and Offgassing Requirements and Test Procedures for Materials in Environments that Support Combustion, NHB 8060.1A, February 1974.

11-18. Electrostatic Control for Assembly and Test Areas, JPL Internal Document 625-263A, September 1980.

11-6 630=1

APPENDIX A

GLOSSARY

r::\

A-1 630~1

APPENDIX A

GLOSSARY

AACS Altitude and Articulation Control Subsystem ADSP advanced digital SAR processor AGC automatic gain control AHSE assembly, handling, and shipping equipment ALDFP Assistant Laboratory Director for Flight Projects (JPL) ALTA Altimeter Antenna Subsystem (Radar System) APA Allowance for Project Adjustment i1ADR Basic Altimeter Data Record BCE bench checkout equipment BFPQ block floating-point quantizer BIDR Basic Image Data Recoru bpi bits per inch BRDR Basic Radiometer Data Record CAT Contract Administration Team CCAFS Cape Canaveral Air Force Station CCE Centaur cargo element CCT computer-compatible tape CDR Critical Design Review CDS Command and Data Subsystem CE command element CISS Centaur Integrated Support Syste~ CITE Cargo Integration Test Equipment CMOS complementary metal-oxide semiconductor CO-I co-investigator COMPLEX Committe on Lunar and Planetary Exploration DM development model DSCC Deep Space Communications Complex DSN Deep Space Network DSS Deep Space Station ECL emitter-coupled logic EDR Experiment Data Record EElS End-to-End Information System EICD Electrical Interface Control Drawing I•: OM end of mission ESMC Eastern Space Missile Center (formerly AFETR) ES Engineering Specification E&TA Energy and Technology Applications FEM Forward Equipment Module FM flight model FMEA failure mode/effect analysis L<'OO Flight Operations Office FPSO Flight Project Support Office (JPL) FSO Flight Science Office GCF Ground Communication Facility GDC General Dynamics Corporation GMS Geosynchronous Meteorological Satellite GOES Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite GRDR Global Radiometry Data Record

A-2 630=1

GLOSSARY (Continued)

GSFC Goddard Space Flight Center (Greenbelt, MP) GTDR Global Topography Data Record HAC Hughes Aircraft Company HGA high-gain antenna HPF Hazardous Payload Facility IPSD Interface Planning and Schedule Document I&Q in-phase and quadrature IF intermediate frequency IPSD Interface Planning and Schedule Document I R&D independent research and development IRD Interface Requirement Document JPL Jet Propulsion Laboratory (Pasadena, CA) JSC Johnson Space Center (Houston, TX) JTIDS Joint Tactical Information Distribution Systems (military communication satellite) KSC Kennedy Space Center (Merritt Island, FL) LeRC Lewis Research Center (Cleveland, OH) LGA low-gain antenna LRR Launch Readiness Review LVS Launch Vehicle System MGT Mission Control Team MDE mission-dependent equipment MDP Mission Design Panel MDT Mission Design Team MGA medium-gain antenna MIG microwave integrated circuit MICD Mechanical Interface Control Drawing MICS Mangement Information Control System MIDR Mosaicked Image Data Record MIP Mission Integration Panel MIPL Multimission Image Processing Laboratory (JPL) "Ml'1C Martin Marrieta Corporation MOA Memorandum of Agreement MOS Mission Operations System MOSDT MOS Design Team MOSST Mission Operations Science Support Team MOU memorandum of understanding MPSF Multimission Photographic Support Facility M/S mail station MSDT Mission and Sequence Design Team NASCOM NASA Communications Network NAV Navigation Team NDT Navigation Development Team NHB NASA Handbook NMI NASA Management Instruction NOA New Obligational Authority NOC Network Operations Center (JPL) NOCC Network Operations Control Center (DSN) NRT nonreal time ~ NSP NASA Support Plan \~ ___ :' NSTS National Space Transportation System OAST Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology (NASA)

A-3 GLOSSARY (Continued)

OD orbit determination OSSA Office af Space Science and Applications (NASA) OTM orbit trim maneuver PAD Program Approval Document PADR Preprocessed Altimeter Data Record PC power converter PDR Preliminary Design Review PDT Project Design Team P/FR problem/failure report PI principal investigator PIDR Polar Image Data RecorJ PIP Payload Integration Plan PlU Processor Input Unit PMR Project Management Report PMS Program Management System POP Project Operating Plan PPF Payload Processing Facility PPL Project Problem List PRF pulse repetition frequency PSG Project Science Group PV Pioneer Venus PVO Pioneer Venus Orbiter PWB printed wiring board QA quality assurance RAIHG Radar Investigation Group RD Requirements Document RDPS Radar Data Processing System RDPT Radar Data Processing Team REM Rocket Engine Module RET Radar Engineering Team RF radio frequency R&QA reliability and quality assurance RS Radar System RSR Resources Status Report R/T real time RTS Radar Target Simulator RTG Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generator RD Requirements Document RSS Rotating Service Structure SAR synthetic aperture radar SBS Satellite Business Systems S/C spacecraft SCT Spacecraft Team SE support equipment SEDR Supplementary Experiment Data Record SFOC Space Flight Operations Center SFS Spacecraft Flight System SIR Shuttle Imaging Radar SIRD Support Instrumentation Requirements Document S&MD Science and Mission Design SMDS Science and Mission Design System

A-4 l~'l .,

GLOSSARY (Continued)

SRB solid (fueled) rocket booster (for Shuttle) SRM Solid Rocket Motor SRR System Requirements Review SRM System for Resources Management SSE sensor support equipment SSE system support equipment SSEC Solar System Exploration Committe (NASA) SSMI Special Sensor Microwave Imager (Air Force) STALO stable local oscillator TMM thermal mass model T&C te-lemetry and command TCM trajectory correction maneuver TDA Telecommunications and Data Acquisition TDRSS Tracking and Data Relay Satellite System TDS Tracking and Data System TNC threaded nut connector UADR Unprocessed Altimeter Data Record UPN unique project number VLBI Very Long Baseline Interferometry VOl Venus orbit insertion VOIR Venus Orbiting Imaging Radar VPF Vertical Processing Facility VRM Venus Radar Mapper WBDL wideband data line WBS Work Breakdown Structure

A-5 ..

APPENDIX B

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN , INTERNATIONAL SOLAR POLAR MISSION AND VENUS RADAR MAPPER MISSION

~·

B-1 ...

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN INTERNATIONAL SOLAR POLAR MISSION AND VENUS RADAR MAPPER MISSION

For the Procurement of Trave 1 ing Wave Tube Prnp_1 ifiers

from Thomson-CSF

Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Pasadena, CA.

Ju 1y 20, 1983

[:...... --'

B-3 ..

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

At the termination of the U.S. spacecraft for the International Solar Polar Mission (ISPM), an agreement was reached to continue the procurement of the TWTA from Thomson-CSF, then under contract with TRW, to get some return on· the investment in this fixed-price contract. The contract was taken over by the JPL ISPM Project Office which was given additional funding for this task. The contract is for the development, qualification, fabrication, and delivery of flight hardware. At the time of termination no specific user was identified. It has now been determined that the Venus Radar Mappe~ (VRM) Project will be the user of this hardware. Accordingly, this Memorandum of Agreement establishes, effective this date, the following:

1. VRM will assume the technical direction of this contract. 2. Accounts and personnel for the contract management will remain as presently established. 3. Funding from ISPM for this procurement activity is limited to a total of $994K.

B-4 Memorandum of Agreement Page 2

4. All funds for this procurement will be managed by the VRM Project.- Any requisitions or work orders to be charged to ISPM will be co-signed by the ISPM Project Office.

5. Cost increases beyond the $994K funding provided by ISPM will be borne by VRM •

.}t_ ~!_ .L~~~- ·~. u.~~roject Manager International Solar Polar Project

{L~ /-o 1 (1~3 ~-=-~ate ~Ge~~?J:~~~-Venus Radar Mapper fr~I~~-Mail

Concurrence

b Director-

~; \___ __ ..

B-5 630.,.1

\.., ___ --

APPENDIX C

M~ORANDUM OF AGREEMENT FOR USE OF ,THE ADVANCED DIGITAL SAR PROCESSOR (ADSP) BY THE SHUTTLE IMAGING RADAR (SIR) PROGRAM AND THE VENUS RADAR MAPPER (VRM) PROGRAM

C-1 " Nl\5/\ 630.,.1 r.....__ ~. National Aeronautics and Space Administration Washington. D.C. 20546

Mem~randum ~f Agreement (MOA)

Agreement for Use of the

Advanced Digital SAR Processor (ADSP)

by the Shuttle Imaging Radar (SIR) Program

and the Venus Radar Mapper (VRM) Program

Apprc.val:

· Date: 1 '\.~} "11 Director oration Div. (EL-4)

Date: fl--ti·P3 Date:/.?~ ) R. Hills, VRM Program Manager ord, Director C--- (EL-4) e & Applications

C-3 630al

Purpose

This Memorandum of Agreem~nt establishes an agreement between the Aerospace Research Division of OAST, the Solar System Exploration Division of OSSA, and the Earth Science and Applications Division of OSSA to assure completion of the Advanced Digital SAR Processor {ADSP) as scheduled and to provide for use of the ADSP by the Shuttle Imaging Radar {SIR), Venus Radar Mapper {VRM), and processing research projects. · Background

The ADSP, being developed by JPL under OAST sponsorship, is expected to be the basic element of the radar image correlation system for SIR-e and VRM. It is an essential element in fulfillment of OSSA's commitment to complete VRM within its allocated resources for a 1988 launch. To fulfill this commitment, the ADSP development and performance demonstrations must be completed by mid-fiscal year 1986. At that point in time, the SIR and VRM projects will need regular access to the system in order to incorporate the mission peculiar modifications that are required. It is recognized that the ADSP is an engineering model system and the necessary improvements for evolution to an operational status for the SIR and VRM missions are not the responsibility of OAST. it is also recognized that the ADSP will be used as a research unit for continued development of SAR processing technology. The major ·advancements in synthetic aperture radar data correlation speed and flexibilit.Y offered by the ADSP system developed by OAST ~- and JPL will provide significant advantages to the SIR and VRM programs in both \ __ ~ product quality and cost.

ADSP engineering evaluating will be accomplished using SIR-B data in late 1985 and early 1986. The SIR-C Project will depend completely on the ADSP for mission image processing during the last nine months of 1987. The VRM Project will depend completely on the ADSP for the systematic processing of radar images during the primary mapping period from July 1988 to April 1989. Additional SIR flights and an extended VRM mission are likely to require ADSP support for several more years if system performance and funding situations permit. It is expected that these missions will constitute only a fractional load for the ADSP. Up to one shift {8 hours) per day will remain available for continued processing research if· so directed and funded by OAST.

Responsibilities a. OAST agrees to maintain the required program funding commitments to the ADSP which provide for the completion of system demonstrations by mid-fiscal year 1986. The funding plan, as of the date of this agreement, consists of $1.4 M in FY 84, $1.3 M in FY 85 and $0.8 M in FY 86. ADSP development will be in

C-4 compliance with RTOP 506-58-15 and the ADSP Program Plan presented to OAST by JPL on 9/25/81. By April 1986, the ADSP will be made available for use by the SIR and VRM projects. At the completion of system performance demonstrations, the ADSP will be baselined and the configuration frozen. The basic cast for supporting the baseline system will be funded by OAST.

b. OSSA accepts the condition that the ADSP is an engineering model system designed for proof-of-concept through performance demonstrations.

c. Each agrees to provide mission peculiar hardware, software, maintenance, and the configuration control necessary to adapt the ADSP for operational or research use and return it to the baseline configuration. Each will budget for such adaptations, sharing expenses where appropriate. Permanent changes to the baseline configuration will be made' only by agreement among the · signatories or their designated representatives.

C-5 " 630-1

APPENDIX D

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT FOR SUPPORT BY THE FLIGHT PROJECT SUPPORT OFFICE TO THE VENUS RADAR MAPPER PROJECT

~"""-· \__.

D-1

\~1 630~1

AGREEMENT FOR SUPPORT BY

FLIGHT PROJECT SUPPORT OFFICE

VENUS RADAR MAPPER PROJECT

OCTOBER 1983

PREPARED BY: A. G. Conrad

APPROVED BY: t~Lt6!~ R. R. Green, Manager Flight Project Support Office

c.~

D-3 \3~ 630<»1

VRM-FPSO SUPPORT AGREEMENT

The Venus Radar Mapper (VRM) Project with its launch in April 1988 will use a considerable amount of multi-mission hardware, software and ser vices provided by the Flight Projects Support Office (FPSO) through the Space

Flight Operations Center (SFOC), and by the Office of Tracking and Data Acqui-· si tion (TDA) to accomplish its mission operations functions. VRM must and will commit to the use of non-dedicated syst,ems to a great extent in order to achieve its mission objectives in the most cost-effective manner. Therefore, it is important to specify weli in advance the support that will be provided to

VRM. This agreement addresses the FPSO support to VRM; a complementary agree ment will be prepared with TDA for Network Operations Center· (NOC) support.

It is understood that commitment of specific capabilities to VRM by FPSO is contingent upon decisions yet to be made relative to resources; dollars and manpower. Additional review of these agreements will take place on a regular basis. Both organizations agree to inform the other promptly of changes in requirements, capabilities, or commitments. Subject to such changes, the signatories agree that the VRM technical and budget plans are based on the provision of the support itemized below and that FPSO is committed to exercise appropriate management initiative to develop and provide to the VRM Project this support on a schedule consistent with the VRM MOS pre-launch preparations and the post-launch flight operations activities.

FPSO will provide SFOC support to the VRM Project in the following areas:

D-4 Navigation Monitoring and Control Command Telemetry Data Processing, Analysis and Display Image and Photo Processing Data Storage, Retrieval and Distribution Remote Data Base Access Telecommunications System Analysis Sequence Generation SFOC Test

The nature of the support, in terms of resources for hardware and software design and development, computer purchase ,and operations, and operations and maintenance personnel staffing, is based on the information shown in Table 1.

"Baseline" computer support indicates that computer operations beyond some specified level will be provided by the VRM Project. The FPSO Requirements and Support Plan will detail the relationship between VRM and FPSO.

Each of the areas of support are discussed in the following sections in order to document the understanding of which functional elements will be provided by FPSO and which will be provided by VRM. Assumptions about NOC support are noted for completeness.

NAVIGATION

The SFOC will provide the following navigation functions for VRM:

1. Development and maintenance of a precision Venus ephemeris.

2. Development and maintenance of the multi-mission navigation accuracy

analysis -software system ATHENA. (The ATHENA program is an important

planning tool used for statistical error analysis and for esta-

blishing tracking requirements.)

3. Conversion of navigation flight operations software to the new funda-

mental reference frame adopted by the International Astronomical

Union (IAU).

D-5 TABLE 1: SUPPORT FROM FPSO (SFOC) TO VRM

SFOC SERVICES

VRM MOS FUNCTIONS HARDWARE SOFTWARE COMPUTER STAFFING

NAVIGATION X X Baseline X

MONITORING & CONTROL X X X Multimission Ops Available

COMMAND X X X Multimission Commanding Available t:J I (J'\ TELEMETRY DATA PROCESSING, ANALYSIS & DISPLAY X Building X Blocks m 00 IMAGE & PHOTO PROCESSING X X Baseline X 0

J-! DATA STORAGE , RETRIEVAL AND DISTRIBUTION X X X X

REMOTE DATA BASE ACCESS X X X X

TELECOMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM ANALYSIS X X Baseline X

SEQUENCE GENERATION X X Baseline SEG Ops Available

SFOC TEST X X X X ·J ·J ·J .. It is assumed that the NOC will provide radio metric data conditioning and

calibration functions. VRM will provide operations personnel for orbit deter-

mination, maneuver, and trajectory analysis functions during flight operations.

(FPSO m~y assume responsibility for orbit determination and trajectory opera-

tions at some later date dependent upon the results of current discussions

about SFOC operations philosophy.)

MONITORING AND CONTROL

Overall monitoring and control of the VRM spacecraft flight system will

utilize the functional capabilities and services of the SFOC Multimission

Control Team in support of the VRM Mission Control Team. Delegation of opera-

tiona! responsibility has yet to be defined. Monitoring and control of the

Operations Control Center in support of VRM. will be supplied by the SFOC and

the NOC.

COMMAND

Multimission command system capabilities will be supplied by the SFOC and

NOC in support of VRM. VRM will provide table entries for the multimission

command translator to be used in sending VRM command messages, via NOC CMD and

the DSN, to the VRM spacecraft.

TELEMETRY DATA PROCESSING, ANALYSIS AND DISPLAY

Real time data received at each DSS will be routed to the NOC where, it

is assumed, frame synchronization will occur. These data will be stored in

the SFOC data management system. Decommutation, engineering unit conversion

and alarm monitoring will be done in SFOC-provided work stations by the MCT. 0

D-7 630=1

Playback data received at each DSS will be recorded on computer compatible tape (CCT) and sent to JPL. The data will be frame synchronized in a system using the baseline multimission capabilities augmented to the extent necessary using VRM funds. SFOC will provide baseline EDR and SEDR generation capabi- li ties. These capabilities, modified if necessary by VRM-peculiar software, will provide radar experiment data records and S/C engineering data records to the VRM project through the data managemep.t system and CCT' s. Engineering analysis will be performed by VRM personnel in non-real-time using SFOC- provided computers. Science analysis will occur in non-real-time, generally using produc~s derived from subsequent processing of the radar experiment data records on a combination of VRM- and SFOC-provided equipment within the VRM

Radar Data Processing System.

Display of engineering data, either real-time or non-real-time, will be. (') at SFOC-provided work stations that provide interactive access to the VRM data base and computational and graphical display capabilities to VRM analysts.

VRM will provide one high resolution color graphics terminal. One workstation will be located in the multimission MCT area, permitting members of that team to provide support during some off-prime shifts. SFOC will provide building- block software modules for accomplishing VRM-specific tasks at the work stations. VRM will provide the necessary table entries to the work stations to permit the multimission software modules to perform decommutation, engineering unit conversion and alarm limit monitoring. Mapping of the software elements into an integrated system for VRM and the testing of the system will be a VRM responsibility.

D-8 Operations and maintenance personnel for the multimission portions of VRM

ground system will be provided by SFOC. VRM will provide additional operators

for handling tapes associated with the frame synchronization of the Original

Data Records and the creation of SAR, altimeter and engineering data records.

IMAGE AND PHOTO PROCESSING

The principal radar imaging and altimetry products will be produced by the

FPSO-supported Multimission Image Processing Laboratory (MIPL). These products

will be in the form of digital tapes and photographic images. The MIPL and

the Multimission Photography Support Facility (MPSF) will prepare the first

copies of these products at FPSO expense. Duplication of these products for

analysis and public release will be the responsibility of the VRM Project.

VRM will supply to the MIPL the output files of the basic image data c.~' records produced by the Advanced Digital SAR Processor (ADSP) . and the un

processed altimeter data records produced by the PIU in the form of 6250 bpi

CCT' s. The basic image data records will contain strips of radar images

which will be mosaicked into frames of radar imagery by the MIPL. MIPL

will produce the Global Topography Data Records on CCT from the altimeter

data records.

The MIPL and the MPSF will produce, at VRM expense, second-order data

products required by the science analysis teams.

DATA STORAGE, RETRIEVAL AND DISTRIBUTION

SFOC will prepare a Data Management System that will allow storage,

retrieval, and distribution of data to analysts through their work stations.

This system will store imaging and altimetry data, spacecraft and radar

D-9 630 ... 1

engineering data, EDR's, SEDR's, and a variety of uplink· and ground data system

status information types for about two years.

VRM will utilize and supplement this capability to establish a project

archive and data distribution activity during the mission for VRM-specific

data products, including hard-copy products. The plan for establishing a

per~nent archive of mission data products is TBD.

REMOTE DATA BASE ACCESS

SFOC will provide access to the data base from remote sites. This capa

bility will be utilized by spacecraft analysts at MMC in Denver. VRM will

fund the communications between JPL and MMC and the terminal equipment at

MMC. Because of the quantity of radar data required to do any scientific

analysis, there is no pla-n to provide remote access to the radar data for

scientific investigators.

TELECOMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM ANALYSIS

SFOC will provide generalized tools to· aid VRM in performing tele

communications system analysis. The VRM Spacecraft Team analysts will use

these tools in evaluating telecom link and telecom hardware performance

during the mission. VRM -will utilize any FPSO-funded multimission telecom

munication operations capability to the extent possible.

SEQUENCE GENERATION

SFOC will provide generalized tools that will aid the VRM MOS in planning

sequences and publishing an integrated SequenGe of Events (SOE) required for

project mission operations. VRM will use these tools to the extent possible.

D-10 lLl~ •

630=1 SFOC TEST

SFOC will provide the necessary s~pport to allow the project to test its

readiness to support the flight operations phase of the mission. Generation

of data to create a realistic test environment will also be provided by SFOC.

D-ll APPENDIX E

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GALILEO AND VRM PROJECTS

E-1

141 630.,.1

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

THE GAL I LEO PIWJECT

AND

THE VENUS RADAR MAPPER PROJECT

I)( j) . ( /' ; j\IJ 1-u · ~- --~-J-.L~~{..!.:...J.~~~-' _. __JJ)!'_· (rp:_:~

Casani, Mana~er -~n H. Gerpheide, Mana~er (;ali leo Venus Radar Mapper Project

.----~·)_~I_ -'~ _(_ ~ ~-L~-- _/__;! -1- __[j__JJ Dntc --

E-3 _I: 630c:ol

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

THE GAL lLI<:O AND VRM PROJECTS

ThiR Memorandum of Agreement idf'nti ffps all of the GA11leo equipment to he provided to the VRM Pro.1ect except the CDS and CDS support equipment.

Attitude and Articulation Cor:t.~~-!_ St~h._~stem

I. One prototype unit, non-flight, Attitude Control ~:lectronics (ACE) consisting of:

One processor subassembly (CPU plus CPU I/O) One power supply subassembly One 32K memory subassembly One set ACR Input/Output

2. Two complete, flight quali fled, Attitude Control Electronics (ACF.) (which constitutes one S/C set) consisting of:

Two processor subassemblies (CPU plus CPU l/0) Two power supply subassemblies Two 32K memory subassemblies Two sets of ACE Input/Output subassemblies Spare parts

3. ACF. documentation:

Drawings - one reproducible set HRCR - each unit "As built" list - each unit Log books - each unit

4. Delivery Schedule:

One prototype unit (1/2 S/C set) July 1985 One flight unit (1/2 S/C set) January 1986 One flight unit with spnre parts (1/2 S/C set) June 1986

5. Reimbursement

This agreement is based upon tlw prototype unit (1/2 redundAnt ACE) and a fourth flight qualified unit (1/2 redundant ACE) being p~oduced in 1984 and ·1985 by the GAli1eo Project. A fixed price reimbursement of $2.5M will be made to GLL from VRM. The reimbursement is based on the ATAC option including th~ SF.U fixes. If the RHEC option is adopted, the reimbursement will be renegotiated. :I'he VRM Project will reimburse the GLL Project by journalin~ charges against GLL accounts in the amount of ~· $348K in 1984 and $2152K t n 1985 to VRM Account number 524-41034-0-3430. V

E-4 Power Subsystem

1. One complete internally redundant, flight qualified, set of power sub system equipment made up of:

One 50 VAC 2.4 KHz, Inverter subassembly (2004A22) One Power Distribution subassembly (PDU-1) (2004A2l) One Pyro Switching subassembly (PSU-1) (2004A31)

2. Power Subsystem Documentation:

Drawings - one reproducible set Inverter, PDU, PSU HRCR - each unit "As built" list - each unit Log books - each unit

3. Delivery Schedule

One set Power Equipment June 1986 (Inverter, PDU-1, PSU-l)

Data Memory Subsystem (DMS) and Associ a ted Tes~uipment

1. One complete Odetics tape recorder and support equipment

2. DMS Documentation Drawings - one reproducible set HRCR "As built" list Lo~ books

3. Delivery Schedule One recorder and support equipment June 1986

Galileo Spacecraft Shipping Container and Associat~d Equipment

1. One container and the following associated equipment: S/C Handling Adapters 2 each Adapter Rings 2 each Liftin~ Fixture 1 each Adapter Pad Assemblies 2 each Beam Installation each Transport Mount Assembly each

2. Delivery Schedule

Container and equipment June 1986

E-5 ISO : ~ ,.~ . 630""1

Custody of the above equipment that is at KSC will be' ·t.ransferred to VRM after the GLL launch. In addition, after launch, VRM will assume custody of the fuel propellant trailer, high pressure gas cart~·and if available, the launch complex trailers. Some return shipments may then be rerouted to Denver at no additional coat to GLL.

JRC/JHG/GLP :ma.1

E-6

\ c:::--1