ISU Word Template
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Paper Session III-B - Space Station On-Orbit Assembly and Operation
1991 (28th) Space Achievement: A Global The Space Congress® Proceedings Destiny Apr 25th, 1:00 PM - 4:00 PM Paper Session III-B - Space Station On-Orbit Assembly and Operation L. P. Morata Vice President, Deputy General Manager, McDonnell Douglas Space Systems Company, Huntington Beach CA F. David Riel Deputy Director, System Engineering and Integration, McDonnell Douglas Space Systems Company- Space Station Division Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings Scholarly Commons Citation Morata, L. P. and Riel, F. David, "Paper Session III-B - Space Station On-Orbit Assembly and Operation" (1991). The Space Congress® Proceedings. 9. https://commons.erau.edu/space-congress-proceedings/proceedings-1991-28th/april-25-1991/9 This Event is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences at Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Space Congress® Proceedings by an authorized administrator of Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SPACE STATION FREEDOM ASSEMBLY AND OPERATIONS Larry P. Morata Vice President, Deputy Project Manager—DDT&E McDonnell Douglas Space Systems Company-Space Station Division Huntington Beach, California and F. David Kiel Deputy Director, System. Engineering and Integration McDonnell Douglas Space Systems Company-Space Station Division Huntington Beach, California ABSTRACT Eight Man. Crew Capability (EMCC) by 31 December 2000 as shown, in Figure 1. The United States and its international partners are well Recent design, on the way to developing Space Station Freedom which will changes as part: of the SSF program restructure activity have be a very large orbiting facility with many capabilities for altered the Space Station configu ration and design from conducting space operations. -
Space Act Agreement Between the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and Moon Express Inc. for Lunar Catalyst Article 1
SPACE ACT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION AND MOON EXPRESS INC. FOR LUNAR CATALYST ARTICLE 1. AUTHORITY AND PARTIES In accordance with the National Aeronautics and Space Act (51 U.S.C. § 20113), this Agreement is entered into by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, located at 300 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20546 (hereinafter referred to as "NASA") and Moon Express, Inc. located at 100 Space Port Way, Cape Canaveral, Florida 32920 (hereinafter referred to as "Partner" or "Moon Express"). NASA and Partner may be individually referred to as a "Party" and collectively referred to as the "Parties." ARTICLE 2. PURPOSE This agreement is an amended version of Space Act Agreement #18251, which went into effect on September 30, 2014. NASA recognizes that private-sector investment in technologies intended to enable commercial lunar activities has been increasing. In addition to recognizing these activities NASA wants to encourage and enable commercial successes to cultivate the increased innovation and entrepreneurship in the commercial space transportation sector. The “Lunar Cargo Transportation and Landing by Soft Touchdown” (Lunar CATALYST) initiative, is consistent with the National Space Transportation Policy. Per this policy, NASA is “committed to encouraging and facilitating a viable, healthy, and competitive U.S. Commercial space transportation industry”. This initiative also supports the internationally shared space exploration goals of the Global Exploration Roadmap (GER) that NASA and 11 other space agencies around the world released in August 2013. The GER acknowledges the value of public-private partnerships and commercial services to enable sustainable exploration of asteroids, the Moon and Mars. -
KPLO, ISECG, Et Al…
NationalNational Aeronautics Aeronautics and Space and Administration Space Administration KPLO, ISECG, et al… Ben Bussey Chief Exploration Scientist Human Exploration & Operations Mission Directorate, NASA HQ 1 Strategic Knowledge Gaps • SKGs define information that is useful/mandatory for designing human spaceflight architecture • Perception is that SKGs HAVE to be closed before we can go to a destination, i.e. they represent Requirements • In reality, there is very little information that is a MUST HAVE before we go somewhere with humans. What SKGs do is buy down risk, allowing you to design simpler/cheaper systems. • There are three flavors of SKGs 1. Have to have – Requirements 2. Buys down risk – LM foot pads 3. Mission enhancing – Resources • Four sets of SKGs – Moon, Phobos & Deimos, Mars, NEOs www.nasa.gov/exploration/library/skg.html 2 EM-1 Secondary Payloads 13 CUBESATS SELECTED TO FLY ON INTERIM EM-1 CRYOGENIC PROPULSION • Lunar Flashlight STAGE • Near Earth Asteroid Scout • Bio Sentinel • LunaH-MAP • CuSPP • Lunar IceCube • LunIR • EQUULEUS (JAXA) • OMOTENASHI (JAXA) • ArgoMoon (ESA) • STMD Centennial Challenge Winners 3 3 3 Lunar Flashlight Overview Looking for surface ice deposits and identifying favorable locations for in-situ utilization in lunar south pole cold traps Measurement Approach: • Lasers in 4 different near-IR bands illuminate the lunar surface with a 3° beam (1 km spot). Orbit: • Light reflected off the lunar • Elliptical: 20-9,000 km surface enters the spectrometer to • Orbit Period: 12 hrs distinguish water -
Space Station Freedom. a Foothold on the Future. INSTITUTION National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC
DOCUMENT RESUME ED 310 939 SE 050 885 AUTHOR David, Leonard TITLE Space Station Freedom. A Foothold on the Future. INSTITUTION National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC. Office of Space Sta.:Ion. REPORT NO NP-107/10-88 PUB DATE 89 NOTE 49p.; Colored photographs and drawings may not reproduce well. PUB TYPE Reports - Descriptive (141) EDRS PRICE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Aerospace Technology; Engineering Technology; Planning; *Satellites (Aerospace); Science Materials; *Science Programs; *Scientific Research; *Space Exploration; *Space Sciences IDENTIFIERS *Space Station ABSTRACT This booklet describes the planning of the space station program. Sections included are: (1) "Introduction"; (2) "A New Era Begins" (discussing scientific experiments on the space station); (3) "Living in Space";(4) "Dreams Fulfilled" (summarizing the history of the space station development, including the skylab and shuttle); (5) "Building a Way Station to Worlds Beyond" (illustrating an approach to building the space station); (6) ''Orbital Mechanics" (discussing the maneuverability of the space station, including robotic application);(7) "Evolving with Versatility" (describing blueprints for expanding a space station); and (8) "Foothold on the Future" (discussing the future plans of the space station program). (YP) **************************************-******************************* * Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made * from the original document. *********************************************************************A* -
October 2011 Issue 2
Issue 2 October 2011 All about the Chinese Space Programme GO TAIKONAUTS! Editor’s Note As promised, this issue is delivered as a special issue on the Chinese space station Cover Story programme. The flawless launch of the Tiangong 1 was really ... page 2 Quarterly Report April - June 2011 Launch Events There were two success- ful space launches in the second quarter of 2011. On 10 April 2011 at 4:47:04 Beijing Time, a Long March 3A (Y19) lifted-off from Pad 3 in Xichang Satellite Launch Centre, putting the Beidou IGSO 3 navigation sat- ellite into orbit. It was the first Chinese Dawn of the Chinese Space Station Era space launch of 2011 and the eighth op- A Textbook Launch erational Beidou satellite. The satellite History turned a new page at 21:16:03 Beijing Time on 29 September 2011, entered its working orbit ... page 3 when a Long March 2F (CZ-2F T1) rocket lifted-off from Pad 921 at the Jiu- quan Satellite Launch Centre in China. In contrast with other launch vehicles that took-off from the same pad on previous occasions, ... page 6 Proposal Mutual Rescue Operations Between the On The Spot Tiangong and ISS? Background Touch the Chinese Space Programme in Three Days The ISS began six-crew member opera- Report from the 4th CSA-IAA Conference on Advanced Space Technology tion in 2009, and the U.S. shuttle retired in Shanghai in July 2011. Crew transportation and An Open and International Conference emergency rescue now totally depends To the Chinese space programme and people paying attention to it, early upon the Russian Soyuz vehicle. -
Lunar COTS: Using the Moon’S Resources to Enable an Economical and Sustainable Pathway to Mars and Beyond
Lunar COTS: Using the Moon’s Resources to Enable An Economical and Sustainable Pathway to Mars and Beyond Dr. Allison Zuniga, Dr. Dan Rasky, Bruce PiGman NASA Ames Research Center LEAG MeeIng, Nov. 1, 2016 1 Background • President Obama’s 2010 Naonal SPace Policy set the following goal for NASA: – By the mid-2030’s, send humans to orbit Mars and return them safely to Earth. • As a result, NASA has established its Journey to Mars and Evolvable Mars CamPaign (EMC) to: - InvesIgate architectures to further define capabiliIes needed for a sustainable human presence on the surface of Mars. - Proving Ground Objecve: Understand the nature and distribuIon of volales and extracIon techniques and decide on their potenal use in future human exploraon architecture. • Under the EMC, NASA has also develoPed a Pioneering SPace Strategy with the following principles: - Opportuni)es for U.S. commercial business to further enhance the exPerience and business base; - Near-term mission oPPortuniIes with a cadence of human and roboIc missions Providing for an incremental buildup of capabilies; - SubstanIal new interna)onal and commercial partnerships, leveraging the current ISS PartnershiPs while building new cooPerave ventures. 2 Moon as a “Stepping Stone” to Mars • ProsPect and extract lunar resources to assess the From the Moon value proposion to NASA and our Partners. – Lunar resources may prove beneficial for inclusion in future Mars architectures, e.g., lunar-derived propellant • Apply the proven COTS model to develoP low-cost commercial capabiliIes and services, such as: – Lunar Landers and Rovers – Resource Prospecng Techniques – Lunar Mining and ISRU capabiliBes – Lunar Relay CommunicaBon Satellites – Power StaBons • Use campaigns of missions, instead of single missions, in a 3-Phase apProach to incrementally develoP capabiliIes and lower risks. -
Closing Comments
Closing Comments The concept of a Shuttle supporting the assembly of a space station was not an entirely new idea when Space Station Freedom was authorized in 1984. Such concepts had been evaluated during the late 1960s, as the United States and the Soviet Union competed in the race to the Moon. By the early 1970s, the two nations were on more friendly terms and keen to participate in a joint project as Apollo was being phased out and a series of Salyut space stations were being introduced. The American proposal for an Apollo to dock with a Salyut was rejected, as was a proposal to have a Soyuz dock with Skylab. So Apollo docked with Soyuz in the summer of 1975. That program was so successful that talks began almost immediately to assess the pros- pects for a Shuttle-Salyut docking in the early 1980s. In parallel, NASA devised plans for the Shuttle to reactivate Skylab. Neither of these proposals bore fruit. By the early 1980s, the idea of using a Shuttle to assemble and resupply a large space station remained, and would become the lynchpin of the Space Station Freedom before plans for that, too, were revised. By the time of the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 the assembly of Mir had been underway for several years. But Russia, which inherited the station and the spacecraft which serviced it, was hard pressed to continue the requisite funding. Looking back two decades to the 1990s, the merger of the American Shuttle and the Russian space station programs seems so logical, since they complemented each other. -
Earth's Moon: Humanity's Gateway to the Solar System
Earth's Moon: Humanity's Gateway to the Solar System Wendell Mendell A Musing Delivered to the Annual LEAG Meeting Washington, DC September 14, 2010 What is a Gateway? • Literally…. – 1 a : 1GATE 1,2 b : a supporting frame or arch in which a gate is hung • Is the Moon literally at gateway? – No, of course not. What is a Gateway? • Metaphorically…. – a : GATE 4a b : a passage for navigation or travel: as (1) : any one of a limited number of points by which the traffic of a defined region can enter… • Is the Moon metaphorically a gateway? – NASA, specifically SMD, goes off into the solar system regularly and regards the Moon as something of a nuisance rather than an entrance. What is a Gateway? • Madison_Avenue_speak….. – A pathway purported to be the best or most convenient or most desirable entrance to a destination" (e.g., Webster, Texas, is the gateway to NASA) • So what are we trying to sell……and to whom? – Most people would answer “NASA”. If so, the specific target must be ESMD, because they have not yet gone anywhere, much less into the solar system (except for LRO). What is ESMD in the market for and does it have any money? – The title of this talk says “Humanity”. What is Humanity in the market for and does it have any money? – What is the relationship between NASA and Humanity? Timeline for Human(ity) Spaceflight • 1958 – 1968 NASA vs. USSR to LEO • 1968 – 1972 NASA Apollo to the Moon – Science added to Apollo – Samples returned, ➪ creation of Planetary Science – Transmogrification of <Apollo Generation> • {Moon becomes nonscientific object to NASA Science} • 1973 –1975 Skylab, Apollo-Soyuz (LEO) • 1972 – 2010 Space Shuttle (LEO) – Growth of Astronaut Corps • 1984 – International Space Station (LEO) • [1989 – 1992] SEI • {Emergence of Apollo Generation billionaires} • [2004 – 2011?] VSE Human(ity) Spaceflight Policy • 1958 – 1972 None. -
Private Sector Lunar Exploration Hearing
PRIVATE SECTOR LUNAR EXPLORATION HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION SEPTEMBER 7, 2017 Serial No. 115–27 Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 27–174PDF WASHINGTON : 2017 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY HON. LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas, Chair FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas DANA ROHRABACHER, California ZOE LOFGREN, California MO BROOKS, Alabama DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon BILL POSEY, Florida ALAN GRAYSON, Florida THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky AMI BERA, California JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma ELIZABETH H. ESTY, Connecticut RANDY K. WEBER, Texas MARC A. VEASEY, Texas STEPHEN KNIGHT, California DONALD S. BEYER, JR., Virginia BRIAN BABIN, Texas JACKY ROSEN, Nevada BARBARA COMSTOCK, Virginia JERRY MCNERNEY, California BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana PAUL TONKO, New York DRAIN LAHOOD, Illinois BILL FOSTER, Illinois DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida MARK TAKANO, California JIM BANKS, Indiana COLLEEN HANABUSA, Hawaii ANDY BIGGS, Arizona CHARLIE CRIST, Florida ROGER W. MARSHALL, Kansas NEAL P. DUNN, Florida CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana RALPH NORMAN, South Carolina SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPACE HON. BRIAN BABIN, Texas, Chair DANA ROHRABACHER, California AMI BERA, California, Ranking Member FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma ZOE LOFGREN, California MO BROOKS, Alabama DONALD S. -
The International Space Station: Legal Framework and Current Status, 64 J
Journal of Air Law and Commerce Volume 64 | Issue 4 Article 3 1999 The nI ternational Space Station: Legal Framework and Current Status Rochus Moenter Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc Recommended Citation Rochus Moenter, The International Space Station: Legal Framework and Current Status, 64 J. Air L. & Com. 1033 (1999) https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc/vol64/iss4/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at SMU Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Air Law and Commerce by an authorized administrator of SMU Scholar. For more information, please visit http://digitalrepository.smu.edu. THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION: LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND CURRENT STATUS ROCHUS MOENTER I. THE INTERNATIONAL SPACE STATION A. BACKGROUND AND CURRENT STATUS HE DEVELOPMENT and construction of an International Space Station (ISS) began with President Reagan's an- nouncement in 1984 that the United States of America intended to build a permanently inhabited civil space station in the earth's orbit, later labeled "Space Station Freedom."' In con- nection with the announcement, President Reagan invited other countries, in particular Canada, Europe and Japan, to partici- pate in the project. This invitation was subsequently accepted by several countries, including the members of the European Space Agency (ESA).2 Some of the countries accepting were Belgium, the Federal Republic of Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, the United Kingdom, Canada through the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) and the Govern- ment of Japan (GOJ). Many years of negotiations followed, mainly between NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) and the re- spective national space agencies, regarding the construction, de- velopment and operation of an ISS. -
Lunar University Network for Astrophysics Research: Comprehensive Report to the NASA Lunar Science Institute March 1, 2012
Lunar University Network for Astrophysics Research: Comprehensive Report to The NASA Lunar Science Institute March 1, 2012 Principal Investigator: Jack Burns, University of Colorado Boulder Deputy Principal Investigator: Joseph Lazio, JPL Page 1 3.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Lunar University Network for Astrophysics Research (LUNAR) is a team of researchers and students at leading universities, NASA centers, and federal research laboratories undertaking investigations aimed at using the Moon as a platform for space science. LUNAR research includes Lunar Interior Physics & Gravitation using Lunar Laser Ranging (LLR), Low Frequency Cosmology and Astrophysics (LFCA), Planetary Science and the Lunar Ionosphere, Radio Heliophysics, and Exploration Science. The LUNAR team is exploring technologies that are likely to have a dual purpose, serving both exploration and science. There is a certain degree of commonality in much of LUNAR’s research. Specifically, the technology development for a lunar radio telescope involves elements from LFCA, Heliophysics, Exploration Science, and Planetary Science; similarly the drilling technology developed for LLR applies broadly to both Exploration and Lunar Science. Lunar Laser Ranging LUNAR has developed a concept for the next generation of Lunar Laser Ranging (LLR) “A new Lunar Laser Ranging (LLR) program, if conducted as a low cost robotic mission or an add- retroreflector. To date, the use of the Apollo on to a manned mission to the Moon, offers a arrays continues to provide state-of-the-art promising and cost-effective way to test general science, showing a lifetime of >40 yrs. This relativity and other theories of gravity…The program has determined properties of the lunar installation of new LLR retroreflectors to replace interior, discovered the liquid core, which has the 40 year old ones might provide such an opportunity”. -
ILWS Report 137 Moon
Returning to the Moon Heritage issues raised by the Google Lunar X Prize Dirk HR Spennemann Guy Murphy Returning to the Moon Heritage issues raised by the Google Lunar X Prize Dirk HR Spennemann Guy Murphy Albury February 2020 © 2011, revised 2020. All rights reserved by the authors. The contents of this publication are copyright in all countries subscribing to the Berne Convention. No parts of this report may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, in existence or to be invented, including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without the written permission of the authors, except where permitted by law. Preferred citation of this Report Spennemann, Dirk HR & Murphy, Guy (2020). Returning to the Moon. Heritage issues raised by the Google Lunar X Prize. Institute for Land, Water and Society Report nº 137. Albury, NSW: Institute for Land, Water and Society, Charles Sturt University. iv, 35 pp ISBN 978-1-86-467370-8 Disclaimer The views expressed in this report are solely the authors’ and do not necessarily reflect the views of Charles Sturt University. Contact Associate Professor Dirk HR Spennemann, MA, PhD, MICOMOS, APF Institute for Land, Water and Society, Charles Sturt University, PO Box 789, Albury NSW 2640, Australia. email: [email protected] Spennemann & Murphy (2020) Returning to the Moon: Heritage Issues Raised by the Google Lunar X Prize Page ii CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1. INTRODUCTION 2 2. HUMAN ARTEFACTS ON THE MOON 3 What Have These Missions Left BehinD? 4 Impactor Missions 10 Lander Missions 11 Rover Missions 11 Sample Return Missions 11 Human Missions 11 The Lunar Environment & ImpLications for Artefact Preservation 13 Decay caused by ascent module 15 Decay by solar radiation 15 Human Interference 16 3.