Enabling Human Space Exploration Through Integrated Operational Testing

49th International Conference on Environmental Systems ICES-2019-80 7-11 July 2019, Boston, Massachusetts

Relevant Environments for Analysis and Development (READy): Enabling Human Space Exploration Through Integrated Operational Testing

David A. Coan 1 The Aerospace Corporation, at the NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX 77058 USA

Trevor G. Graff 2 Jacobs, at the NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX 77058 USA

Kelsey E. Young 3 NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, MD, 20771, USA

Marcum L. Reagan 4 NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX 77058, USA

and

Bill Todd 5 Universities Space Research Association, at the NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX 77058, USA

ASA is currently developing a multi-phase human exploration plan to explore various destinations throughout N the solar system. These campaigns are currently focused on missions to cislunar space, the Moon, and Mars. All future exploration missions include Extravehicular Activity (EVA) operations that will be comprised of both engineering-focused tasks for constructing and maintaining infrastructure, as well as science-driven operations for exploration of the natural environment. Integrated operational tests, also known as analogs, provide relevant data for informing concepts, fleshing out technical details, and evolving systems. Analogs close technology, capability, and science gaps; identify and develop the best systems, innovations, and operational approaches; identity things that are effective and ineffective in a mission environment; and inform the development of strategic architecture and concept of operations. These analogs further inform the Exploration EVA System Concept of Operations document by exploring the combination of operations, engineering, and science for future destinations in mission-like environments. Exploration and analog experts from NASA’s Exploration Integration & Science Directorate (EISD), located at the Johnson Space Center (JSC), established the Relevant Environments for Analysis and Development (READy) Project in order to enable human space exploration through the integration and testing of technologies, systems, operations, and science. The READy team leads the development and execution of high-fidelity operational missions that closely mimic the space environment of interest. The READy Project facilitates exploration objectives through four themes 1) Tools, 2) Techniques, 3) Technologies, and 4) Training, and takes place in three general types of environments 1) Aquatic, 2) Terrestrial, and 3) Laboratory. READy fulfills key objectives that enable human exploration, while providing synergy and ensuring integration across a wide variety of activities. These efforts will ultimately lead to mission readiness and success, reduce risk, increase scientific return, and improve the affordability of NASA programs and missions. This paper outlines READy’s strategy and implementation plan.

1 Operations & Engineering Specialist, Extravehicular Activity Office, READy Management Team, Mail Code XX4 2 Chief Scientist, Astromaterials Research & Exploration Sciences, READy Management Team, Mail Code XI3 3 Research Scientist, Planetary Geodynamic Laboratory, READy Management Team, Mail Code 6980 4 Project Manager, Exploration Mission Planning Office, READy Management Team, Mail Code XM1 5 Project Specialist, Exploration Mission Planning Office, READy Management Team, Mail Code XM

I. Introduction ASA is now developing plans for exploring planetary bodies throughout the solar system, with campaigns N focused on returning humans to cislunar space and the surface of the moon, and culminating with human missions to Mars. These exploration missions will include Extravehicular Activity (EVA) operations constructing and maintaining vehicles and infrastructure and for scientific exploration and sample collection of the natural environment. Multi-disciplinary integrated operational tests and mission simulations, also known as analog missions, provide relevant data for informing concepts, fleshing out technical details, and evolving systems. Analog missions allow teams to conduct early, end-to-end validation of concepts of operations (con ops), develop systems and equipment needed for exploration operations, information mission architecture development, and help close current gaps in technology, capability, and science.1-5 For EVA operations, analog missions directly inform the Exploration EVA System Concept of Operations document6 by exploring the combination of operations, engineering, and science for future destinations in mission-like environments. Engineers and scientists from NASA’s Exploration Integration & Science Directorate (EISD) established the Relevant Environments for Analysis and Development (READy) Project in order to enable human space exploration through the integration and testing of technologies, systems, operations, and science. This project utilizes four themes7 – 1) Tools, 2) Techniques, 3) Technologies, and 4) Training – and three general types of environments – 1) Aquatic, 2) Terrestrial, and 3) Laboratory – while leading the development and execution of high-fidelity operational exploration missions that closely mimic the space environment of interest. READy provides integration across a wide variety of activities, ensures synergy between various projects, and fulfills key objectives that enable human exploration. The efforts of READy will ultimately lead to mission readiness Figure 1: NASA’s EISD READy Project logo and success, reduce risk, increase scientific return, and improve the affordability of NASA programs and missions.

II. NASA’s Exploration Missions NASA’s plans for the crewed exploration of the solar system include campaigns focused on missions to cislunar space, the surface of the Moon, and the surface of Mars.

A. Cislunar Space Initial cislunar exploration will be focused on the Deep Space Gateway. This orbital outpost will be a crew-tended spaceport in lunar orbit which will serve as a gateway to the lunar surface, and eventually human missions to Mars. It will feature a power/propulsion element using solar electric power (instead of chemical thrusters), habitat and logistics modules, and an airlock and robotic arm for external operations (such as EVA). Ultimately it is meant to support robotic and human missions to the lunar surface, as well as assist in missions departing for other destinations in the solar system.

B. Lunar Surface Exploration concepts currently being examined at NASA involve humans returning to cislunar space and the surface of the Moon for the first time since the Apollo missions. A program of both robotic and human missions will provide a robust set of capabilities to enable exploration, science, and commercial interests as part of long-term utilization plan. Lunar exploration and science missions will add to our knowledge of the Moon, explore the potential for humans to live and work on planetary surfaces, allow humans to learn how to exploit in-situ resources, and be a critical test bed for concepts of systems bound for Mars, enabling humanity to venture further into the Solar System.

International Conference on Environmental Systems These lunar surface missions will allow for continued scientific research of the Moon, add to our knowledge of planetary bodies, and enable profound discoveries about the Solar System and our place in it. This will include advances in astronomy, physics, materials science, astrobiology, geology, and geophysics. The return of lunar samples will improve our understanding of planetary surfaces and impact cratering, provide insight into the evolution of the Earth, and allow for studying the history of the Sun. Lunar missions will progress with a phased approach, starting with smaller, short missions and expanding to a long duration presence on the surface.6 They will take place at multiple different landing sites spread across the surface of the Moon, with EVA operations involving a variety of engineering-focused and science-driven tasks.

C. Mars One of the primary goals of NASA’s future human plans is to land on and explore the surface of Mars. Once on the surface and acclimated to the gravity environment, the crew will conduct EVA operations, including pioneering tasks to assemble the base infrastructure, maintenance tasks to keep the infrastructure operating, and science tasks for geoscience and astrobiology data and sample acquisition.6 With such a long signal latency and blockage, EVA operations will be directed by an IV crewmember, with input from the Science Team both during and between EVAs. The crew will utilize their in-situ knowledge to plan some of the operations, with MCC concurring and putting together the detailed timelines. Many of the science operations tasks will likely be far from the habitat, so the EVA crew will rely on a navigation system to find the correct sampling area and find their way back to the habitat or rover.

III. Utilizing Analog Testing for Exploration Mission Development & Maturation NASA teams utilize integrated operational test (analog mission) evaluations to close knowledge and technology gaps, develop systems for exploration missions, and determine viable operational approaches.1-5 These missions drive out results for things that do and do not work in a mission environment, using the results to inform strategic architectural development efforts. Analog sites and the skills that enable them to be used as realistic representations of the targeted spaceflight environment are likely to turn into the training locations and scenarios once astronaut crews are assigned, while also providing training opportunities for scientists and engineers on the complexities of exploration mission operations in a flight-like environment.

A. Knowledge & Capability Gaps While humans have had continued presence in low Earth orbit and have walked on the surface of the moon during the Apollo missions, gaps still exist in the current capabilities, state of the art technology, and science needed to enable the goals for exploration. READy projects, have a direct impact in closing the following knowledge and technology gaps and in developing the con ops, hardware, and science procedures required for future exploration.

A.1 Scientific Knowledge Gaps (SKG) The planetary science community is dedicated to unraveling the secrets of the Solar System, including targets likely to be explored in the future by astronauts (i.e., small bodies, the Moon, and Mars). In order to track scientific progress and manage outstanding science questions, Analysis Groups have formed for each target destination. The Lunar Exploration Analysis Group (LEAG)8, the Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group (MEPAG)9, and the Small Bodies Assessment Group (SBAG)10 hold annual meetings, and assign Special Action Teams (SAT) to address specific outstanding questions, and manage outstanding knowledge gaps about remaining science and exploration questions about each target body. Most relevant to NASA’s near-term plans for a return to the Moon, LEAG manages the SKGs for lunar science, a document that breaks down lunar exploration knowledge gaps into three categories: understand the lunar resource potential, understand the lunar environment and its effects on human life, and understand how to live and work on the lunar surface.8 READy team member K. Young currently serves as the Surface Operations Chair on the LEAG Executive Committee, and team members Young and T. Graff are engaged with all of the mentioned science teams through their work within the Astromaterials Research & Exploration Sciences (ARES) division at NASA, ensuring that READy outcomes and lessons learned have an impact on community driving documents.

A.2 Exploration and EVA Knowledge & Capability Gaps Per NASA’s EVA Office, the EVA System Maturation Team (SMT) was established in order to 1) identify, champion and mature technology as to support, enable, and enhance current and future missions, 2) prioritize investments given the current hardware status and mission scope and schedule, and 3) communicate plans and needs 3

International Conference on Environmental Systems with projects (Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit (xEMU) and Orion Crew Survival System (OCSS)), stakeholders, and funding sources. In order to identify and track gaps in EVA knowledge and capabilities, the EVA Office created the EVA Gap Tool.11 This online tool’s purpose is to “identify, analyze and work to mitigate the three types of gaps, (strategic, knowledge, and technology) between the EVA physical hardware architecture and the concept of operations for exploration missions”. READy team member D. Coan is a member of NASA’s Exploration EVA team that tracks gaps, ensuring that READy objectives work to close those gaps.

B. Exploration Architecture & Mission Systems Analog missions allow for evaluations of systems and equipment in an operational environment, enabling teams to identify and develop the best systems and approaches.1-5 Inclusion of purpose-built prototype hardware for evaluation and maturation in a full “mission” operational environment often provides an opportunity to discover things and may help identify problems that would not be found in standalone testing. These missions provide an understanding of system and architectural interactions between Operations, Engineering, and Science.

C. Integrated Exploration Operations Analog missions provide one of the best opportunities to examine operational approaches for all future exploration missions. 1-5 They scrutinize the needs of the Mission Control Center (MCC) team, Science Team, Intravehicular Activity (IVA) crew, and EVA crew. Operations that require the integration of these areas present unique challenges. Mission analogs can analyze and identify capabilities and techniques for directing EVA operations that also involve science-driven tasks. In addition, analogs can simulate signal (communication & data) latency or loss, and ascertain strategies for how to overcome these challenges. 12-18 Concepts of operations can be accurately tested to determine their viability or needed changes. For the IVA crewmembers, analog missions evaluate what kind of tools (support system) the IV will need in order to effectively handle the large amount of information and tasking that they must contend with while actively directing an EVA.19 At longer communication latencies, the in-situ IV will effectively take on the role of IV, partial Flight Director, partial EVA Officer, and partial Flight Surgeon. With an integrated Science Team, analog missions allow for evaluation of a flexible execution methodology (flexecution)20 and decision- making protocols for science tasks during EVA operations.12-18 Recent Space Shuttle and International Space Station (ISS) EVAs have taken place on engineered vehicles where mission control has access to detailed data, however missions to planetary bodies will involve the exploration of somewhat unknown natural areas. While these exploration missions to planetary surfaces will have some precursor data available beforehand, they will also rely on the crew with boots on the ground to make key decisions and determine acceptable deviation from the plan. Key findings from analog missions directly inform NASA’s Exploration EVA System Concepts of Operations6. This document details the high-level ideas and capabilities needed for operating at various destinations, including cislunar space, the surface of the moon, on asteroids, and on the surface of Mars. READy team member D. Coan manages the Exploration EVA System Concept of Operations book, ensuring that READy outcomes and lessons learned will be directly incorporated into this influential document.

D. Exploration EVA System Concepts of Operations The primary goal for EVA during analog missions is to inform the Exploration EVA System Concept of Operations by examining the combination of operations and engineering with science for exploration destinations in a mission- like environment. 1-6 NASA’s EVA Office utilizes the evaluations and results to:

 Advance the current state and plans for the Exploration EVA System and concept of operations so that they align with future mission needs  Understand EVA capability needs and concepts of operations for a wide range of exploration destinations being considered by NASA  Assess the high-level system and architectural interactions between operations, engineering, and science  Determine and document closures to gaps in EVA capabilities and knowledge  Develop and document concepts of operations for EVA at the exploration destinations (EVA-EXP-0042)6  Provide critical information for development of the Exploration EVA (xEVA) Spacesuit (xEMU)  Realize the needs of EVA equipment and enable the development of concepts for design maturation on the road-to-flight

International Conference on Environmental Systems IV. NASA’s READy Project Exploration, operations, EVA, science, and analog experts from NASA’s Exploration Integration & Science Directorate (EISD) established the READy Project in order to enable human space exploration through integrated testing across EISD, JSC, and NASA. In addition, this project provides a mechanism for infusion of technologies and concepts from academic, commercial, other government agencies, and international partnerships. The READy team leads the development and execution of high-fidelity operational exploration missions that closely mimic the space environment of interest. The READy Project facilitates exploration objectives through the four themes (4 T’s).3,7

A. READy Project Themes Figure 2 displays the four READy over-arching themes. Each theme has further defined sub-categories with example topics that highlight the extensive reach of the project. Numerous topics interrelate and overlap between multiple themes. Each theme, its sub-categories, and various topics are described below.

Figure 2: The READy Project Themes - Tools, Techniques, Technologies, and Training.

1. Tools READy seeks to advance the current state of knowledge about the tools required for astronauts to scientifically explore and complete pioneering tasks required for surface exploration. These are broken down into sub-categories of EVA tools and systems, instrumentation, and sample collection. The EVA tools and systems category includes integration and testing of both handheld and power tools that are envisioned for future surface EVAs. Handheld tools encompass those needed for pioneering tasks (building, maintenance, repair, etc.), as well as those required for scientific tasks (scoops, rakes, hammers, tongs, core tubes, etc.). Drilling is a scientifically necessary capability on a planetary surface mission, and in order to meet this need, the READy project is testing and evaluating both handheld and large drilling systems.13-15 Tool transport and stowage, of both large and small equipment, is also of great interest for efficient and effective planetary surface EVA operations. Drills, scientific instruments, sample stowage containers, and other infrastructure equipment can be large and will require enhanced transportation capabilities if moved by a crewmember while out on EVA. Transport systems explored with the READy project include advanced carts and tool caddies focused on maximizing travel distance, modularity, and overall efficiency.13-15 In addition, READy is testing concepts for storing small frequently used tools in easily accessible locations directly on the suit. Another critical EVA system facilitated by the READy project, with particular international interest from our European Space Agency (ESA) partners, is a crew rescue system concept for

International Conference on Environmental Systems a system that could be utilized for transporting an incapacitated EVA crewmember on a planetary surface to a safe haven.14-15 Scientific instrumentation envisioned for planetary EVA can be broadly classified as either in-situ analytical instruments or instrument packages. The fifty years since Apollo have seen substantial advancements in technology capable of providing in-situ high-resolution contextual geochemical, mineralogical, and geophysical data real-time during an exploration mission.21,22 These instruments can be deployed in handheld mode, mounted on tripods, or have collected samples fed into them by crewmembers. While these instruments have proven to be valuable in terrestrial field science, there is much to be learned about the EVA con of ops of such in-situ instrumentation. Instrument packages or payloads, with similar capabilities to the Apollo Lunar Surface Experiments Package (ALSEP), are also of interest for EVA planning and science evaluations. READy seeks to evaluate con ops for both in-situ and instrument packages through integrated analog tests, as well as smaller more focused deployments.14,15,21,22 Tools and concepts required for sample acquisition, handling, contamination mitigation, transportation, and stowage are critical for progressing advanced EVA con ops development. Returned samples from any planetary mission will be worldwide scientific treasures and careful planning needs to be incorporated into their sampling during EVA. The Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation Office, part of the Astromaterials Research and Exploration Science (ARES) Division, is responsible for the curation of extraterrestrial samples from NASA's future sample return missions. READy team members T. Graff and K. Young are also members of the ARES Division, and ensure the proper tools, procedures, materials, and methodology of sample collection are incorporated into READy activities.

2. Techniques Just as critical as the tools astronauts will use during exploration missions are the techniques by which they implement them. Operational procedures need to be heavily evaluated prior to flight so that astronauts and mission control teams are completely coordinated with the process and procedures to be executed. The READy team has broken down the various techniques into sub-categories of exploration operations, EVA operations, science operations, and robotic operations. Exploration operations include procedure development, communication methods and protocols, data visualization and management, and timeline tracking and scheduling.13-15 Communication signal latency (time delay), communication blockages, and bandwidth limitations are examples of exploration operational issues for which techniques are evaluated and tested by READy activities. An additional exploration operational technique that is currently under development and maturation is the user interface located on the workstation used by the IV crewmember to quickly and efficiently visualize and manage the all the EVA’s data and activities (crew health, consumables, science, construction, etc.).13-15,19 READy team members D. Coan and M. Reagan, both with extensive experience in Space Shuttle and ISS training and flight control, ensure that proper spaceflight-related operations are part of READy activities. As mentioned previously, NASA’s EVA Office utilizes analog missions to develop and document concepts of operations for EVA at the exploration destinations6. These missions allow for end-to-end operations to assess architecture and EVA System capability needs. Much as with the overarching exploration operations discussed just above, EVA operations on natural planetary surfaces will involve systems and techniques not required for excursions in low Earth orbit. This is especially true as science becomes a large focus of the tasks done during while EVA. READy team member D. Coan, a member of the EVA Office and former EVA Officer (instructor and flight controller) in the Flight Operations Directorate, ensures realistic and relevant EVA operations and capabilities are part of READy activities. Science operations include traverse planning, decision-making protocols, sample acquisition and documentation.18 The exact and precise completion of traverse plans designed from orbital data cannot be expected to maximize science return.20 An astronaut well trained in science should be able to, within flight rules, flexibly complete a traverse plan by adapting real-time, potentially in communication with science support teams should the infrastructure support it, to what they are seeing on the ground. Developing techniques and a mission architecture that can support this flexible execution, or “flexecution” methodology, is critical to maximizing the science return of an exploration mission. In addition, when completing EVAs designed to scientifically explore and collect samples it is critical to develop a con ops to assist the EVA crewmembers to efficiently identify and communicate high priority targets with the science team for proper documentation and concurrence before sampling. Recent READy activities have focused exploring the parameters of the “flexecution” methodology, as well as on sample identification and high-grading protocols.13-15 Robotic operations include control protocols (autonomous vs crew controlled) as well as advances in human- robotic interfaces. READy activities continue to be a great platform to test these types of robotic operational techniques, especially for academic and commercial partners.

International Conference on Environmental Systems

3. Technologies READy seeks to advance emerging technologies and infuse them, when applicable, into current and future NASA programs and activities. The READy project largely accomplishes this goal by building collaborations with commercial, academic, research, governmental, and international partners.1-3 The testing and evaluation activities that are part of the READy project provide a platform for innovations that often get infused into the other three READy themes. Emerging technologies that the READy is currently focused on include informatics and intelligent systems, virtual and hybrid reality environments, medical and human performance measures, countermeasures and exercise systems, operations of miniaturized DNA sequencing solutions, EVA support systems, and advanced spacesuit developments.

4. Training Training is just as critical in the READy portfolio as the other three themes. Providing training experiences and opportunities in mission-like environments is vital to skill set development and team building. READy provides cross- disciplinary training for engineers, spaceflight operators, and scientists by providing realistic mission environments or scientific expeditions that promote communication between various disciplines and team building experiences. READy activities also provide valuable astronaut crew training by providing expeditionary and leadership opportunities.23,24 In addition, these activities provide a forum for student involvement and engagement.

B. READy Project Environments Testing the concepts described above in the areas of tools, techniques, technologies, and training occurs in a variety of analog environments. The critical quality of a good analog environment for testing the 4 T’s is that it has qualities resembling exploration targets. These analog environments are found everywhere, including aquatic, terrestrial, and laboratory environments.3

Figure 3: The READy Project environments - Aquatic, Terrestrial, and Laboratory.

1. Aquatic The aquatic environment has long been used for astronaut training and analog missions. Controlled facilities like NASA’s original Weightless Environment Training Facility (WETF), its current Neutral Buoyancy Laboratory (NBL), University of Maryland’s Neutral Buoyancy Research Facility (NBRF), or ESA’s Neutral Buoyancy Facility (NBF) are some of the primary means of simulating the microgravity environment of space. More remote facilities like Aquarius Reef Base, where the READy team has conducted 22 successful NEEMO missions (see below), provide challenging and unique opportunities to conduct end-to-end mission simulations, including dive excursions relevant to planetary surface EVAs, while performing interior habitat experiments, robotic demonstrations, and more.1-4,13-18

International Conference on Environmental Systems The READy team is currently exploring additional aquatic-based mission simulations to further enhance training and testing opportunities.

2. Terrestrial The terrestrial field environment provides the best scientific context for planetary surface mission training and simulations. Terrestrial environments that are uniquely similar to planetary surfaces have been used extensively for multiple NASA analog missions including the long-standing Desert Research and Technology Studies (Desert RATS) project.25 Apollo astronauts participated in a number of geology field trips designed to introduce them to fundamental geologic concepts and to give crews, assigned to specific missions, detailed training in the types of observations they might expect to make on the Moon. This geology and exploration fundamentals training for astronauts continues today and its activities are closely communicated with the READy project with the dual participation of team members T. Graff and K. Young in both projects.23,24 READy is currently conducting scientific investigation and evaluation of tools, techniques, technologies, and training in a number of terrestrial environments.

3. Laboratory Numerous laboratories across JSC and NASA are currently being used by READy associated activities. One example is the Active Response Gravity Offload System (ARGOS). ARGOS is designed to simulate reduced gravity environments, including Lunar, Martian, and microgravity, using a system similar to an overhead bridge crane, which continuously offloads a portion of a human or robotic payload’s weight during dynamic motions. The facility is capable of supporting surface operation studies, suit and vehicle requirements development, suit and vehicle design evaluation, robotic development, mass handling studies, and crew training with both suited and shirt-sleeved subjects. In addition, READy activities incorporate a number of virtual and hybrid reality laboratories at JSC,26 as well as habitat and vehicle mockups.

C. Integrated Operational Tests (Analog Missions) The highest fidelity tests for purposes of informing human spaceflight missions are mission-class integrated operational field tests. These focus on evaluating potential exploration operations and capabilities, including aspects such as developing and testing EVA capabilities, equipment, and operations, and evaluating the integration of science operations into EVA. The most mature example of that is called “NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations”, or NEEMO. Another integrated operational field test is under formulation this year, which is being called NEEMO NXT (Neoteric eXploration Technologies). Both of these field tests are integrated and executed by READy. 1. NEEMO – NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations NEEMO is NASA’s long-standing undersea high-fidelity spaceflight mission analog. It focuses on exploration science, EVA techniques and tools, maturing ISS flight hardware and operations concepts. NEEMO sends groups of astronauts, engineers and scientists to live, work and explore in a challenging environment analogous to the environment experienced currently on ISS and what is expected for future deep space exploration destinations. NEEMO missions allow for evaluations of end-to-end EVA concepts of operations and informatics technologies with crew that are in situ in a true extreme environment, and provides for flight-like interactions between the crew and an MCC and Science Team, which in turn allows evaluation of science operations decision making and communications techniques. To date, 22 NEEMO missions, or space exploration simulations, have been conducted since 2001.1-4,13-18 NEEMO missions are conducted at Aquarius Reef Base (ARB), which includes a shore base in Tavernier, FL, and the world's only undersea research station, the Aquarius habitat, which is located 5.4 miles (9 kilometers) off Key Largo in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. ARB is owned and operated by Florida International University. In NEEMO missions the Aquarius Habitat serves as the “spacecraft”, while the “spacesuit” analog is the KM 37SS Helmet with Wetsuit & Harness for Surface Supplied Diving System (SSDS). The suited EVA crewmembers have clear voice communications with each other, the habitat, MCC and the Science Team back on shore. Each EV crewmember is also sending helmet cam video back to the habitat, MCC and Science Team. Appropriate communications latencies are inserted for the destination being simulated as well. 2. NEEMO NXT A concept currently in development as an add-on and eventual follow-on for NEEMO is the NEEMO NXT project. These analog missions will focus on exploration operations development and training, xEVA informatics,

International Conference on Environmental Systems xEVA con ops, and integration of science operations.27 NXT will offer a high intensity operationally challenging environment, with high workload, elevated stress, reduced crew bandwidth, time pressure, and unexpected external perturbations. The missions will utilize Nuytco Research’s Exosuit Atmospheric Diving Suit and Dual DeepWorker submersible. The Exosuit provides an analogous restrictive suit that requires similar effort for positioning and working in an EVA suit, along with a relatively large helmet volume at 1 ATM to evaluate off the shelf informatics hardware (e.g., the U.S. Navy’s Divers Augmented Vision Display, HoloLens, etc.). In addition to development of exploration systems and crew training, these missions will provide operations training and experience to engineers and scientists that don’t have extensive ops experience. 3. Gateway BAA NextSTEP Habitat testing NASA released a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA), called the NASA Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP), to evaluate future habitation concepts for exploration missions. The purpose is to “provide data and recommendations regarding how the habitation, science, and EVA functions can be acceptably distributed across the elements of the [Gateway]”. The goal is to define acceptable configurations and eventually a configuration option for a habitation module on Gateway. The ground evaluations involve human-in-the-loop (HITL) habitation tests, subsystem standalone tests, and analyses. The HITL evaluations of five to six different contractor habitats will use a standard mission timeline and consistent metrics. These tests will “collect quantitative and qualitative metrics to identify acceptable, unacceptable, and mission enhancing elements” and “use collected data to inform requirements for number and types of [Gateway] modules, distribution of the habitation, science, and EVA functions across the modules, and layout of subsystems and functions within a given module”. Standalone tests are also performed to evaluate subsystems with Subject Matter Experts (SME), using “quantitative and qualitative metrics and a consensus reporting system, to assess contractor subsystems and inform subsystem development requirements for flight”.

D. Exploration Training Integral to preparing for future exploration is training the scientists, engineers, flight controllers, and managers who will be responsible for designing and producing the flight hardware, software, and con ops for future lunar and Martian exploration. Scientists need to understand how to operate in the human exploration operational framework and engineers must understand the driving science requirements that set the framework for what activities will be completed in cislunar orbit and in lunar surface exploration. The READy team is working to develop seminar and classroom-based curriculum focused on training exploration personnel on science, operations, and flight control. These classroom training sessions are then followed by practical field work and then integrated missions. 1. Exploration Ops Classroom Training The exploration ops classroom training will be a seminar and/or classroom-based curriculum focused on training exploration personnel across the various disciplines involved. Seminars will cover topics like exploration spacesuit development, current Mars rover operations, Gateway Program status, lunar architecture status, etc. Focused classroom lessons will cover concepts like an introduction to human spaceflight operations (the state of the art, as practiced on ISS today, and the projected operations that will occur when exploring a planetary body), Spacewalk operations and constraints in microgravity and on a planetary surface, and an introduction to planetary science. 2. Field Geology Ops Training As was the case during the Apollo era, the scientific community will play a large role in selecting future lunar landing sites, training astronauts in geologic principles and sample collection and instrument data acquisition rationale and procedures, developing science instrument procedures for cislunar space, and in supporting real-time operations through a scientific MCC. For this reason, it is vital for engineers working to design the hardware and software crewmembers will use in exploration to understand the high level outstanding science questions about each exploration target, have an understanding of the science requirements of technologies vital for scientific exploration (i.e. in situ instrumentation, sample collection technology, etc.), and have an appreciation for how science support teams will be structured to support exploration. The READy team is designing a classroom and field-based curriculum for engineers, astronauts, and other flight support personnel to gain this critical understanding. 3. Integrated Operational Missions Training culminates in mission-class integrated operational field tests (e.g., NEEMO or NEEMO NXT). Participants from across the organization will be assigned in advance as part of the mission support team, and will bring their unique perspectives to bear. They will participate in all phases of the mission, from initial objective identification and design, to equipment and concept testing, to crew training, to mission product development (e.g., procedures, timelines, mission rules), to mission execution.

International Conference on Environmental Systems E. External Partnerships Another key aspect of the READy analog missions is participation of external partners from various groups outside of NASA.3, 13-16 These external partners come from a wide variety of different places, including ISS international partners, the U.S. government (e.g., Department of Defense), academia (universities), research institutes, and industry. Many of these partnerships provide systems relevant to NASA objectives or bring proxy science that enable the evaluation of NASA objectives. Some also bring other experiments that broaden the understanding of science, while also providing tasks on the crew timeline that help form a complete mission environment. These external partnerships also help with NASA’s public outreach and inclusion of the public in human spaceflight.

F. READy Implementation Strategy Relevant environment testing has varying levels of complexity, and its success is dependent on participants being cross-trained well enough to understand the challenges of meeting the science objectives, doing useful work in a pressurized spacesuit with limited visibility and mobility, all while being constrained by the many daily constraints of a real-time spaceflight operation. This begins with the exploration training described above, which helps ensure the team is speaking the same language, even while bringing their own expertise in a particular area. The testing starts as small-scale standalone tests. Sometimes that is sufficient, and sometimes it progresses to more complicated and more integrated venues. The example of developing and testing the concept of spacesuit informatics may serve as a good illustration. Assuming there will be an in-suit informatics system (e.g., heads-up display – HUD), how would it be used? How would the EV crewmember interface with it in bulky gloves? Does the EV crewmember call up the data they want to see, or does an assistant back in the habitat or on Earth push the data they want to see to them? One could start to answer that by finding some kind of commercial off the shelf (COTS) heads-up display system and testing concepts in a lab. It might progress to testing in a more stressful environment, e.g., inside a dive helmet to be tested in a pool. Finally, it might progress to being tested in the ocean with simulated EVA tasks, two EV crewmembers, and realistic tools and procedures involved. Some concepts can only be fully understood within the full context of a mission environment. To take the spacesuit informatics example further, one might include this evaluation on a NEEMO mission. This adds real science objectives, timeline pressures, a dedicated crew assistant back in the habitat, a Mission Control and Science Team back on “Earth”, astronaut crewmembers as objective end users, and potentially communications latencies. Now most of the key elements from a real planetary exploration scenario are present while using the spacesuit informatics system under evaluation. In this way, the integrated operational missions are able to provide a high fidelity setting for evaluating numerous tools, techniques and technologies. Integrated operational missions are obviously more expensive and time consuming to prepare and execute, so the overall READy strategy is to push testing to the lowest cost, simplest facility that can give results. If it is clear that a higher fidelity test will be required eventually, the strategy is still to start in simpler, cheaper facilities and work toward the proper end level to meet the objectives.

V. Conclusion Results from tests conducted and integrated by READy inform the development of key capabilities, systems, and concepts of operations that will enable human space exploration. READy ensures integration across a wide variety of activities and tests, which provides critical synergy for the success of multiple exploration projects. The results and findings from projects integrated and led by READy will support capability development, reduce risk, increase scientific return, and ultimately lead to successful missions to various planetary destinations. For EVA, results derived from READy efforts are fed directly into the Exploration EVA concepts of operations and provide critical information for development of the Exploration EVA System. The ultimate goals are to provide NASA with robust space exploration capabilities that will improve the future of human spaceflight into the Solar System.

Acknowledgments The authors and READy management/core team members would like to thank Chris Hansen and Brian Johnson from the EVA Office, Cindy Evans and Lisa Pace from ARES, Dan Garrison from Jacobs/ARES, Kim Ess from the EMPO, and Eileen Stansbery from EISD for their support of the project. They would also like to acknowledge Jordan Lindsey from the EVA Office and Adam Naids from the EVA Tools group for their review of the paper. Most importantly, they would like to thank their families for actually enabling analog mission deployments. 10

International Conference on Environmental Systems

References

1Coan, D., “Operational Field Testing for Human Exploration (a.k.a., NASA Analog Projects),” EVA Technology Workshop, 14 September 2016. 2Coan, D., “Operational Field Testing for Human Space Exploration – NASA ‘Analog’ Projects,” SpaceCom, 9 November 2016. 3Coan, D. and Reagan, M., “Enabling Human Exploration Through Integrated Operational Testing: NASA’s Exploration & Science Analogs,” EVA Technology Conference, 17 October 2017. 4Coan, D., “Exploration Analogs Overview and NEEMO 15 & DRATS 2011 Post Mission Summaries,” EVA-EXP-0050, NASA, 13 December 2011. 5Young, K. Graff, T., Bleacher, J., Coan, D., Whelley, P. Garry, W. B., Kruse, S., Reagan, M., Garrison, D., Miller, M., Delgado, F., Rogers, A., Glotch, T. Evans, C., Naids, A., Walker, M., and Hood, A. D., “Supporting Future Lunar Surface Exploration Through Ongoing Field Activities,” Lunar Exploration Analysis Group, 2017. 6Coan, D., “Exploration EVA System Concept of Operations,” EVA-EXP-0042, NASA, 20 December 2017. 7Graff, T., Young, K., Coan, D., Merselis, D., Bellantuono, A., Dougan, K., Rodriguez-Lanetty, M., Nedimyer, K., Chappell, S., Beaton, K., Naids, A., Hood, A., Reagan, M., Rampe, E., Todd, W., Poffenberger, J., Garrison, D., “NEEMO 21: Tools, Techniques, Technologies & Training for Science Exploration,” Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, 2017. 8Shearer C., Eppler D., Farrell W., Gruener J., Lawrence S., Pellis N., Spudis P., Zeigler R., Bussey B., and Neal C., “LEAG Strategic Knowledge Gap – Special Action Team Review,” September 2016. 9Carr M., Beaty D., et. al, “Analysis of Strategic Knowledge Gaps Associated with Potential Human Missions to the Martian System,” June 2012. 10Wargo M., et.al, “Strategic Knowledge Gaps: Enabling Safe, Effective, and Efficient Human Exploration of the Solar System Focus on Near Earth Asteroids,” January 2012. 11NASA EVA Gap Tool: https://eisd.sp.jsc.nasa.gov/EVA/Exploration-EVA-Gaps/SitePages/gaptool.aspx#/ 12Young, K., Bleacher, J., Rogers, A., McAdam, A., Evans, C., Graff, T., Garry, W. B., Whelley, P., Scheidt, S., Carter, L., Coan, D., Reagan, M., and Glotch, T., “Developing Science Operations Concepts for the Future of Planetary Surface Exploration,” Planetary Science Vision 2050 Workshop, 2017. 13Coan, D., “NEEMO 20 Exploration EVA Results,” EVA-EXP-0052, NASA, EVA Exploration Working Group, 9 December 2015. 14Coan, D., “NEEMO 21 EVA Mission Debrief,” EVA-EXP-0053, NASA, EVA Exploration Working Group, 8 November 2016. 15Coan, D., “NEEMO 22 EVA Mission Debrief,” EVA-EXP-0054, EVA Exploration Working Group, 15 December 2017. 16Coan, D., Buffington, J., Reagan, M., Janoiko, B., and Chappell, S., “NEEMO 18 & 19 Post Mission Summary,” EVA-EXP- 0051, EVA Exploration Working Group, 16 December 2015. 17Graff, T., Miller, M., Rodriguez-Lanetty, M., Chappell, S., Naids, A., Hood, A.D., Coan, D., Abell, P., John, K., Todd, W., Reagan, M., Janoiko, J., and Poffenberger, J., “NEEMO 20: Science Training, Operations, and Tool Development,” Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, 2016. 18Young, K., Graff, T., Coan, D., Reagan, M., Todd, W., Naids, A., Walker, M., Hood, A. D., Dougan, K. E., Bellantuono, A., Merselis, D., Thinesh, T., Rodriquez-Lanetty, M., Rampe, E., Evans, C., Pace, L., Garrison, D., Zacny, K., Rehnmark, F., Wei, B., and Chu, P., “Conducting Science-Driven Extravehicular Activities during Planetary Surface Exploration – The NEEMO (NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations) 22 Mission,” Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, 2018. 19Miller, M., “Design and Development of Support Systems for Future Human Extravehicular Activity,” AIAA SciTech, 2017. 20Hodges K. and Schmitt H., “A new paradigm for advanced planetary ﬁ eld geology developed through analog experiments on Earth,” Analogs for Planetary Exploration: Geological Society of America, Special Paper 483, pp. 17-31, 2011. 21Young, K., Bleacher, J., Rogers, A. D., McAdam, A., Evans, C., Garry, W. B., Whelley, P., Graff, T., Coan, D., Reagan, M., Glotch, T., Scheidt, S., Garrison, D., Delgado, F., and Noyes, M. “Incorporating Field Portable Instruments into Planetary Surface Exploration,” NESF, 2017. 22Young, K., Bleacher, J., Rogers, A. D., H. H. Schmitt, McAdam, A., Evans, C., Garry, W. B., Whelley, P., Scheidt S. P., Ito G., Knudson C. A., Graff, T., Bleacher L. B., Whelley N., Evans C. A., Hurtado J. M. Jr., and Glotch, T. D., “The Incorporation of Field Portable Instrumentation Into Human Planetary Surface Exploration,” Earth and Space Science, Vol. 5, No. 11, pp. 697-720, 2018. 23Graff T., Young K., Evans C., Bleacher J., Zeigler R., Tewksbury B., Helper M., and Hurtado J., “Earth and Planetary Science Training for the 2017 Astronaut Class,” Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, 2018. 24Graff T., Evans C., Bleacher J., Young K., Helper M., Tewksbury B., Hurtado J., Edgar L., Thompson R., Stefanov W., Osinski G., Regberg A., Zeigler R., Bauer P., Wilkinson M., Zimmerer M., Timmons M., and Read A., “Earth and Planetary Science Training for NASA’s Newest Astronauts: 2018 Training and 2019 Planning.” Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, 2019. 25Ross A., Kosmo J., and Janoiko B., “Historical synopses of desert RATS 1997–2010 and a preview of desert RATS 2011,” Acta Astronautica, Vol. 90, No. 2, pp. 182-202, 2013. 11

International Conference on Environmental Systems 26Miller, M., Graff, T., Young, K., Coan, D., Whelley, P., Richardson, J., Knudson, C., Bleacher, J., Garry, W.B., Delgado, F., Noyes, M., Valle, P., Buffington, J., and Abercromby, A., “Scientific Hybrid Reality Environments (SHyRE): Bringing Field Work into the Laboratory,” PSIDA- Informatics and Data Analytics, 2018. 27Coan, D., “READy Testing for xEVA System Concepts of Operations and Capabilities During FY19,” NASA, 17 October 2018.

International Conference on Environmental Systems