The NASA astrobiology program

The new discipline of astrobiology addresses fundamental questions about life in the universe: "Where did we come from?" "Are we alone in the universe?" "What is our future beyond the Earth?" Developing capabilities in biotechnology, informatics, and space exploration provide new tools to address these old questions. The U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has encouraged this new discipline by organizing workshops and technical meetings, establishing a NASA Astrobiology Institute, providing research funds to individual investigators, ensuring that astrobiology goals are incorporated in NASA flight missions, and initiating a program of public outreach and education. Much of the initial effort by NASA and the research community was focused on determining the technical content of astrobiology. This paper discusses the initial answer to the question "What is astrobiology?" as described in the NASA Astrobiology Roadmap.     

Success criteria and risk management for the new millennium program

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) New Millennium Program (NMP) is a technology development and validation program that will flight-validate advanced, new technologies with space flight applications. NMP's purpose is twofold. First, it will develop technologies that will enable future spacecraft to be smaller, more capable and reliable, and to be launched more frequently. Second, it will validate the technologies in flight to reduce the risks to future science missions that fly these technologies for the first time. To measure the program's success, NMP has devised a set of criteria that stresses the relevance of technologies selected for flight validation to NASA's 21st-century science mission needs. Also, NMP has instituted a ‘risk management’ policy, where, through a combination of adequate resources and early risk assessment and risk mitigation plans for the technologies, the overall risk of the NMP flights can be rendered acceptable.     

International Space Station as a base camp for exploration beyond low Earth orbit

The idea for using the International Space Station (ISS) as a platform for exploration has matured in the past few years and the concept continues to gain momentum. ISS provides a robust infrastructure which can be used to test systems and capabilities needed for missions to the Moon, Mars, asteroids and other potential destinations. International cooperation is a critical enabler and ISS has already demonstrated successful management of a large multi-national technical endeavor. Systems and resources needed for expeditions can be aggregated and thoroughly tested at ISS before departure thus providing wide operational flexibility and the best assurance of mission success. A small part of ISS called an Exploration Platform (ISS-EP) can be placed in cislunar space providing immediate benefits and flexibility for future exploration missions.We will show how ISS and the ISS-EP can be used to reduce risk and improve the operational flexibility for missions beyond low Earth orbit. Life support systems and other technologies developed for ISS can be evolved and adapted to the ISS-EP and other exploration spacecrafts. New technology, such as electric propulsion and advanced life support systems can be tested and proven at ISS as part of an incremental development program. Commercial companies who are introducing transportation and other services will benefit with opportunities to contribute to the mission since ISS will serve as a focal point for the commercialization of low earth orbit services. Finally, we will show how the use of ISS provides immediate benefits to the scientific community because its capabilities are available today and certain critical aspects of exploration missions can be simulated.     

Rationale and systems architecture for a near-term human lunar return

Early human missions to the Moon have landed on six different sites on the lunar surface. These have all been in the low-latitude regions of the near side of the Moon. Early missions were designed primarily to assure crew safety rather than for scientific value. While the later missions added increasingly more challenging science, they remained restricted to near-side, low-latitude sites. Since the 1970s, we have learned considerably more about lunar planetology and resources. A return within the next five to ten years can greatly stimulate future human space exploration activities. We can learn much more about the distribution of lunar resources, especially about hydrogen, hydrated minerals, and water ice because they appear to be abundant near the lunar poles. The presence of hydrogen opens the possibility of industrial use of lunar resources to provide fuel for space transportation throughout the solar system.This paper discusses the rationale for near-term return of human crews to the Moon, and the advantages to be gained by selecting the Moon as the next target for human missions beyond low-Earth orbit. It describes a systems architecture for early missions, including transportation and habitation aspects. Specifically, we describe a primary transportation architecture that emphasizes existing Earth-to-orbit transportation systems, using expendable launch vehicles for cargo delivery and the Space Shuttle and its derivatives for human transportation. Transfer nodes should be located at the International Space Station (ISS) and at the Earth-Moon L1 (libration point).Each of the major systems is described, and the requisite technology readiness is assessed. These systems include Earth-to-orbit transportation, lunar transfer, lunar descent and landing, surface habitation and mobility, and return to Earth. With optimum reliance on currently existing space systems and a technology readiness assessment, we estimate the minimum development time required and perform order-of-magnitude cost estimates of a near-term human lunar mission.     

Redefining safety in commercial space: Understanding debates over the safety of private human spaceflight initiatives in the United States

In 2009 President Obama proposed a budget for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) that canceled the Constellation program and included the development of commercial crew transportation systems into low Earth orbit. This significant move to shift human spaceflight into the private sector sparked political debate, but much of the discourse has focused on impacts to “safety.” Although no one disputes the importance of keeping astronauts safe, strategies for defining safety reveal contrasting visions for the space program and opposing values regarding the privatization of U.S. space exploration. In other words, the debate over commercial control has largely become encoded in arguments over safety. Specifically, proponents of using commercial options for transporting astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) argue that commercial vehicles would be safe for astronauts, while proponents of NASA control argue that commercial vehicles would be unsafe, or at least not as safe as NASA vehicles. The cost of the spaceflight program, the technical requirements for designing a vehicle, the track record of the launch vehicle, and the experience of the launch provider are all incorporated into what defines safety in human spaceflight. This paper analyzes these contested criteria through conceptual lenses provided by fields of science and technology policy (STP) and science, technology, and society (STS). We ultimately contend that these differences in definition result not merely from ambiguous understandings of safety, but from intentional and strategic choices guided by normative positions on the commercialization of human spaceflight. The debate over safety is better considered a proxy debate for the partisan preferences embedded within the dispute over public or private spaceflight.     

Why we need a space elevator

The goals of and vision for development of a space elevator have been discussed repeatedly. However, why we should develop one has been glossed over. This paper will focus upon the major issue—why build a space elevator infrastructure? It considers why we need a space elevator, what missions it would enable and how far it would reduce costs. There is no doubt that some major missions would be enhanced or significantly enabled by a space elevator infrastructure. Global communications, energy, monitoring of the Earth, global/national security, planetary defense, and exploration beyond low-Earth orbit are a few examples. In the end, if we are serious about extending space development and avoiding limitations on the human spirit, the reason we should build a space elevator is because we must!     

Apollo: Learning from the past,for the future

This paper shares an interesting and unique case study of knowledge capture by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), an ongoing project to recapture and make available the lessons learned from the Apollo lunar landing project so that those working on future projects do not have to “reinvent the wheel”. NASA’s new Constellation program, the successor to the Space Shuttle program, proposes a return to the Moon using a new generation of vehicles. The Orion Crew Vehicle and the Altair Lunar Lander will use hardware, practices, and techniques descended and derived from Apollo, Shuttle, and the International Space Station. However, the new generation of engineers and managers who will be working with Orion and Altair are largely from the decades following Apollo, and are likely not well aware of what was developed in the 1960s. In 2006, a project at NASA’s Johnson Space Center was started to find pertinent Apollo-era documentation and gather it, format it, and present it using modern tools for today’s engineers and managers. This “Apollo Mission Familiarization for Constellation Personnel” project is accessible via the web from any NASA center for those interested in learning answers to the question “how did we do this during Apollo?”     

The International Space Station: a pathway to the future

Nearly six years after the launch of the first International Space Station element, and four years after its initial occupation, the United States and our 6 international partners have made great strides in operating this impressive Earth orbiting research facility. This past year we have done so in the face of the adversity of operating without the benefit of the Space Shuttle. In his January 14, 2004, speech announcing a new vision for America's space program, President Bush affirmed the United States' commitment to completing construction of the International Space Station by 2010. The President also stated that we would focus our future research aboard the Station on the long-term effects of space travel on human biology. This research will help enable human crews to venture through the vast voids of space for months at a time. In addition, ISS affords a unique opportunity to serve as an engineering test bed for hardware and operations critical to the exploration tasks. NASA looks forward to working with our partners on International Space Station research that will help open up new pathways for future exploration and discovery beyond low Earth orbit. This paper provides an overview of the International Space Station Program focusing on a review of the events of the past year, as well as plans for next year and the future.     

Stepping stones toward global space exploration

Several nations are currently engaging in or planning for robotic and human space exploration programs that target the Moon, Mars and near-Earth asteroids. These ambitious plans to build new space infrastructures, transport systems and space probes will require international cooperation if they are to be sustainable and affordable. Partnerships must involve not only established space powers, but also emerging space nations and developing countries; the participation of these new space actors will provide a bottom-up support structure that will aid program continuity, generate more active members in the space community, and increase public awareness of space activities in both developed and developing countries. The integration of many stakeholders into a global space exploration program represents a crucial element securing political and programmatic stability. How can the evolving space community learn to cooperate on a truly international level while engaging emerging space nations and developing countries in a meaningful way? We propose a stepping stone approach toward a global space exploration program, featuring three major elements: (1) an international Earth-based field research program preparing for planetary exploration, (2) enhanced exploitation of the International Space Station (ISS) enabling exploration and (3) a worldwide CubeSat program supporting exploration. An international Earth-based field research program can serve as a truly global exploration testbed that allows both established and new space actors to gain valuable experience by working together to prepare for future planetary exploration missions. Securing greater exploitation of the ISS is a logical step during its prolonged lifetime; ISS experiments, partnerships and legal frameworks are valuable foundations for exploration beyond low Earth orbit. Cooperation involving small, low-cost missions could be a major stride toward exciting and meaningful participation from emerging space nations and developing countries. For each of these three proposed stepping stones, recommendations for coordination mechanisms are presented.     

The PROCESS experiment: amino and carboxylic acids under Mars-like surface UV radiation conditions in low-earth orbit

The search for organic molecules at the surface of Mars is a top priority of the next Mars exploration space missions: Mars Science Laboratory (NASA) and ExoMars (ESA). The detection of organic matter could provide information about the presence of a prebiotic chemistry or even biological activity on this planet. Therefore, a key step in interpretation of future data collected by these missions is to understand the preservation of organic matter in the martian environment. Several laboratory experiments have been devoted to quantifying and qualifying the evolution of organic molecules under simulated environmental conditions of Mars. However, these laboratory simulations are limited, and one major constraint is the reproduction of the UV spectrum that reaches the surface of Mars. As part of the PROCESS experiment of the European EXPOSE-E mission on board the International Space Station, a study was performed on the photodegradation of organics under filtered extraterrestrial solar electromagnetic radiation that mimics Mars-like surface UV radiation conditions. Glycine, serine, phthalic acid, phthalic acid in the presence of a mineral phase, and mellitic acid were exposed to these conditions for 1.5 years, and their evolution was determined by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy after their retrieval. The results were compared with data from laboratory experiments. A 1.5-year exposure to Mars-like surface UV radiation conditions in space resulted in complete degradation of the organic compounds. Half-lives between 50 and 150?h for martian surface conditions were calculated from both laboratory and low-Earth orbit experiments. The results highlight that none of those organics are stable under low-Earth orbit solar UV radiation conditions.     

The decay of NASA's technical culture

The ability of the US government to carry out future space policies depends upon the maintenance of a technically capable space flight agency. During its first decade of operation the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) developed an organizational culture supporting very high levels of reliability. This ‘technical culture’ stressed the importance of in-house technical capability, ‘hands on’ activity and extensive testing. Forces at work on the agency since 1970 have tended to erode the original culture. This article explains the ways in which the beliefs and norms guiding NASA operations have changed since the agency's first decade of operations.     

Software assisted authoring and viewing of ISS crew procedures

The European Space Agency (ESA) initiated a joint project with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and industry partners for improved authoring and execution of Operations Data File (ODF) procedures. The system consists of an authoring tool and a viewer. The authoring tool is currently used by NASA and ESA to write/convert ODF procedures. The viewer will be used onboard the International Space Station (ISS) starting from Flight Increment 11. The new system, thanks to its interaction capability, will help astronauts and operators in the execution of checklist and logic flow procedures that ensure precise performance of experiments and smooth operation of the various systems.     

Economic benefits of the OTV program

A new upper stage for the Shuttle called Orbiter Transfer Vehicle (OTV) is planned by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for a broad range of missions including transfer of very large spacecraft, unmanned and manned servicing at Geosynchronous orbit (GEO). Leading OTV configurations use 13 to 34 tonnes of cryogenic propellants in vehicles based on the existing Centaur or new designs. These OTVs can deliver to Geosynchronous orbit more than double the payload possible with the solid propellant Intertial Upper Stage (IUS), which is currently being developed. This high performance reduces the number of shuttle launches required to deliver a given total mass of payloads. After delivery of current size spacecraft, OTV could be returned to the Orbiter for reuse, saving the cost of building a new stage. OTV performance and flexibility will create the opportunity for the next generation of spacecraft such as Geostationary Platform. In these three ways, the high-performance OTV will provide economic benefits to Space Transportation Systems.     

Advantages and disadvantages of prizes in a portfolio of financial incentives for space activities

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has proposed to use financial prizes to encourage innovation in space technology. Public debate about the use of prizes questions their effectiveness, the role of government compared with the private sector in administering prizes—for example, the Ansari X-Prize for human suborbital flight was privately funded and administered—and other issues that are likely to influence the success of this approach.     

The NASA programme in the 1990s and beyond

This article is an edited summary of a report on the future work of the US National Aeronautics and Space Administration published in May 1988 by the US Congress's Congressional Budget Office. It considers whether NASA will be able to undertake new and ambitious initiatives in the coming decades, or instead hold its spending to current real levels, thus limiting US international leadership in space activities.     

Meditations on the new space vision: the Moon as a stepping stone to Mars

The Vision for Space Exploration invokes activities on the Moon in preparation for exploration of Mars and also directs International Space Station (ISS) research toward the same goal. Lunar missions will emphasize development of capability and concomitant reduction of risk for future exploration of Mars. Earlier papers identified three critical issues related to the so-called NASA Mars Design Reference Mission (MDRM) to be addressed in the lunar context: (a) safety, health, and performance of the human crew; (b) various modalities of mission operations ranging surface activities to logistics, planning, and navigation; and (c) reliability and maintainability of systems in the planetary environment. In simple terms, lunar expeditions build a résumé that demonstrates the ability to design, construct, and operate an enterprise such as the MDRM with an expectation of mission success. We can evolve from Apollo-like missions to ones that resemble the complexity and duration of the MDRM. Investment in lunar resource utilization technologies falls naturally into the Vision. NASA must construct an exit strategy from the Moon in the third decade. With a mandate for continuing exploration, it cannot assume responsibility for long-term operation of lunar assets. Therefore, NASA must enter into a partnership with some other entity--governmental, international, or commercial--that can responsibly carry on lunar development past the exploration phase.     

Using Spacelab as a precursor of science operations for the Space Station

For more than 15 years, Spacelab, has provided a laboratory in space for an international array of experiments, facilities, and experimenters. In addition to continuing this important work, Spacelab is now serving as a crucial stepping-stone to the improved science, improved operations, and rapid access to space that will characterize International Space Station. In the Space Station era, science operations will depend primarily on distributed/remote operations that will allow investigators to direct science activities from their universities, facilities, or home bases. Spacelab missions are a crucial part of preparing for these activities, having been used to test, prove, and refine remote operations over several missions. The knowledge gained from preparing these Missions is also playing a crucial role in reducing the time required to put an experiment into orbit, from revolutionizing the processes involved to testing the hardware needed for these more advanced operations. This paper discusses the role of the Spacelab program and the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center- (MSFC-) managed missions in developing and refining remote operations, new hardware and facilities for use on Space Station, and procedures that dramatically reduce preparation time for flight.     

发展X-37B空间飞机的背后动因分析

文章通过对X-37B飞行器的飞行试验任务分析,指出了X-37B飞行器不是空天飞机,也不是全球快速打击平台,而是一种低成本太空进入能力的飞行验证器,它的作用定位在空间而不是在空中。通过飞行试验和验证试验,旨在打造一个可重复使用的轨道转移运载器。将美国2010年航天战略的重大调整、国际空间站的运行延期和航天飞机退役等事件结合起来,对X-37B发展的背后动因进行分析,有助于了解美国航天发展的未来趋势。经过动因的详尽分析,指出要特别关注美国航天战略调整的两个重心转向,尤其是两个转向背后的动机。如何正确地认识国际空间站的作用定位,对于审视载人航天的未来发展有重要意义。美国航天战略的调整使载人航天的重心回到近地轨道上。基于中国目前的能力现实,建议中国的载人航天重心放在地球轨道上,做好各种能力的建设,并利用这些能力把地球轨道上的事做得更好。     

New microgravity fundamental physics research areas in the ISS era

NASA's microgravity fundamental physics program has used the Space Shuttle to perform high resolutions experiments in space. As we come to the end of the Shuttle era, we will begin to perform research aboard the ISS. A large stable of ground based experiments have been selected from NASA Research Announcements in a variety of disciplines. These investigations will form the backbone from which to select future flight candidates. Research in Laser Cooling and Atomic Physics will enable us to operate highly precise clocks in space. Low temperature physics experiments will use a liquid helium facility with a six-month lifetime. This facility can also support experiments in gravitational physics. Researchers in biological physics will be offered an opportunity to develop future experiments that can benefit from space experimentation. An overview of the future research directions and the benefits to the community of performing research aboard the ISS will be presented.     

The Space Shuttle—Evaluating an American icon

The Space Transportation System (STS), for better or worse, has dominated the US space program for some 30 years and is now an American icon. The Space Shuttle orbiters have flown over 120 missions and certainly accomplished some amazing feats, including the deployment of the International Space Station (ISS), the launch and double repair of the Hubble Telescope, a number of classified missions for the US defense establishment and the cementing of international cooperation in space. As the remaining Space Shuttle orbiters head toward various museums, it is timely to look at the STS program in terms of key US space policy decisions that have paralleled the Space Shuttle’s often troubled history. This article seeks, from both a historical and a policy perspective, to assess what might have been. While noting the major accomplishments of the STS, it also identifies what can best be characterized as major lost opportunities and flawed policy decisions that have had multi-billion dollar consequences. In this regard, the US Congress, the White House, and NASA leadership have all played a role. If there have been failings, they have not been by NASA alone, but the entire US space policy leadership.