Walking to Olympus: An EVA Chronology

Spacewalkers enjoy a view of Earth once reserved for Apollo, Zeus, and other denizens of Mt. Olympus. During humanity's first extravehicular activity (EVA), Alexei Leonov floated above Gibraltar, the rock ancient seafarers saw as the gateway to the great unknown Atlantic. The symbolism was clear, Leonov stepped past a new Gibraltar when he stepped into space. More than 32 years and 154 EVAs later, Jerry Linenger conducted an EVA with Vladimir Tsibliyev as part of International Space Station Phase 1. They floated together above Gibraltar. Today the symbolism has new meaning: humanity is starting to think of stepping out of Earth orbit, space travel's new Gibraltar, and perhaps obtaining a new olympian view, a close-up look at Olympus Mons on Mars. Walking to Olympus: An EVA Chronology chronicles the 154 EVAs conducted from March 1965 to April 1997. It is intended to make clear the crucial role played by EVA in the history of spaceflight, as well as to chronicle the large body of EVA "lessons learned." Russia and the U.S. define EVA differently. Russian cosmonauts are said to perform EVA any time they are in vacuum in a space suit. A U.S. astronaut must have at least his head outside his spacecraft before he is said to perform an EVA. The difference is based in differing spacecraft design philoso- phies. Russian and Soviet spacecraft have always had a specialized airlock through which the EVA cosmonaut egressed, leaving the main habitable volume of the spacecraft pressurized. The U.S. Gemini and Apollo vehicles, on the other hand, depressurized their entire habitable volume for egress. In this document, we apply the Russian definition to Russian EVAS, and the U.S. definition to U.S. EVAS. Thus, for example, Gemini 4 Command Pilot James McDivitt does not share the honor of being first American spacewalker with Ed White, even though he was suited and in vacuum when White stepped out into space. Non-EVA spaceflights are listed in the chronology to provide context and to display the large num- ber of flights in which EVA played a role. This approach also makes apparent significant EVA gaps, for example, the U.S. gap between 1985 and 1991 following the Challenger accident. This NASA History Monograph is an edited extract from an extensive EVA Chronology and Reference Book being produced by the EVA Project Office, NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas. The larger work will be published as part of the NASA Formal Series in 1998. The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance rendered by Max Ary, Ashot Bakunts, Gert-Jan Bartelds, Frank Cepollina, Andrew Chaikin, Phillip Clark, Richard Fullerton, Steven Glenn, Linda Godwin, Jennifer Green, Greg Harris, Clifford Hess, Jeffrey Hoffman, David Homan, Steven Hopkins, Nicholas Johnson, Eric Jones, Neville Kidger, Joseph Kosmo, Alexei Lebedev, Mark Lee, James LeBlanc, Dmitri Leshchenskii, Jerry Linenger, Igor Lissov, James McBarron, Clay McCullough, Joseph McMann, Story Musgrave, Dennis Newkirk, James Oberg, Joel Powell, Lee Saegesser, Andy Salmon, Glen Swanson, Joseph Tatarewicz, Kathy Thornton, Chris Vandenberg, Charles Vick, Bert Vis, David Woods, Mike Wright, John Young, and Keith Zimmerman. Special thanks to Laurie Buchanan, John Charles, Janet Kovacevich, Joseph Loftus, Sue McDonald, Martha Munies, Colleen Rapp, and Jerry Ross. Any errors remain the responsibility of the authors

Spinoff, 1984

A pictorial resume that underlines the challenging nature of NASA programs and their extraordinary demands for technological input, is presented. Also, NASA's current mainline programs, which require development of new technology, are given. A representative sampling of spinoff products and processes resulting from technology utiliization, or secondary application, and the mechanisms NASA employs to stimulate technology utilization are provided. Contact sources for further information are presented

Experimental validation of an L1 controller on a single robotic manipulator on a moving platform and a robotic cooperative network

This thesis reports on laboratory and in-field experimental results for a single robotic manipulator on a moving platform with unmodeled dynamics that aim to validate theoretical predictions for the dependence on control parameters of an L1 adaptive control strategy. The experiments verify expected bounds on the tracking error in terms of the bandwidth of a filter introduced in the control loop. Moreover, the results provide insight into different discretizations of the continuous-time formulation, suggesting that a partial discretization introduced by Cao and Hovakimyan is most suitable for a hardware implementation. A second set of experimental results, obtained from an implementation of the L1 control framework for synchronization and consensus in networks of robotic manipulators, similarly validate theoretical predictions on the sensitivity to network communication delays and network topology

Technology for Space Station Evolution. Volume 4: Power Systems/Propulsion/Robotics

NASA's Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology (OAST) conducted a workshop on technology for space station evolution on 16-19 Jan. 1990. The purpose of this workshop was to collect and clarify Space Station Freedom technology requirements for evolution and to describe technologies that can potentially fill those requirements. These proceedings are organized into an Executive Summary and Overview and five volumes containing the Technology Discipline Presentations. Volume 4 consists of the technology discipline sections for Power, Propulsion, and Robotics. For each technology discipline, there is a Level 3 subsystem description, along with the papers

Advanced Automation for Space Missions

The feasibility of using machine intelligence, including automation and robotics, in future space missions was studied

Research and Technology Objectives and Plans Summary (RTOPS)

The NASA Research and Technology program for FY 1978 is represented by this compilation of the 'Summary' portions of each of the Research and Technology Objectives and Plans (RTOPS). The RTOP Summary is designed to facilitate communication and coordination among concerned technical personnel in government, in industry, and in universities. The first section contains citations and abstracts of the RTOPs. Following this section are four indexes: Subject, Technical Monitor, Responsible NASA Organization, and RTOP Number

Proceedings of the Scientific-Practical Conference "Research and Development - 2016"

talent management; sensor arrays; automatic speech recognition; dry separation technology; oil production; oil waste; laser technolog

Deep Space Gateway Concept Science Workshop : February 27–March 1, 2018, Denver, Colorado

The purpose of this workshop is to discuss what science could be leveraged from a deep space gateway, as well as first-order determination of what instruments are required to acquire the scientific data.Institutional Support, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Lunar and Planetary Institute, Universities Space Research Association ; Executive Committee, Ben Bussey, HEOMD Chief Scientist, NASA Headquarters, Jim Garvin, Goddard Space Flight Center Chief Scientist, Michael New, NASA Headquarters, Deputy AA for Research, SMD, Paul Niles, Executive Secretary, NASA Johnson Space Center, Jim Spann, MSFC Chief Scientist, Eileen Stansbery, Johnson Space CenterPARTIAL CONTENTS: Deep Space Gateway as a Deployment Staging Platform and Communication Hub of Lunar Heat Flow Experiment--Lunar Seismology Enabled by a Deep Space Gateway--In-Situ Measurements of Electrostatic Dust Transport on the Lunar Surface--Science Investigations Enabled by Magnetic Field Measurements on the Lunar Surface--Enhancing Return from Lunar Surface Missions via the Deep Space Gateway--Deep Space Gateway Support of Lunar Surface Ops and Tele-Operational Transfer of Surface Assets to the Next Landing Site--Development of a Lunar Surface Architecture Using the Deep Space Gateway--The Deep Space Gateway: The Next Stepping Stone to Mar