Potential Advantages of Conducting Short Duration Visits to the Martian Surface

Recent NASA concepts for human missions to Mars, including the Evolvable Mars Campaign and Design Reference Architecture 5.0, have focused on the conduct of missions with long duration stays on the Martian surface. The decision to focus on long duration missions (typically to a single site) is driven by a desire to increase the perceived sustainability of the human Mars campaign, predicated on the assumption that sustainability is best achieved by maximizing the level of activity on the surface, providing for continuous growth in operations, and promoting pioneering of Mars. However, executing a series of long duration missions to a single site is not the only option for human exploration of Mars that has been proposed. Other architectures have been evaluated that focus on missions with short duration surface stays, with each mission visiting a separate site on the surface. This type of architecture is less efficient in that elements are not typically reused from one mission to the next but requires a far less complex surface architecture. There are potentially valid arguments to be made that a short duration, multiple site approach could result in different types of advantages when compared to the long duration, single site approach to Mars exploration, particularly for initial human missions to Mars. These arguments revolve around four areas: Achieved Value, Risk Mitigation, Developmental Affordability, and Operational Affordability & Flexibility. The question of Achieved Value relates to the prioritization of goals for Martian exploration. As discussed, goals related to pioneering and expanding human presence are often referenced as justifications for the long duration approach. However, there are other competing goals, including science and exploration. While there is not a clear consensus among planetary scientists, many have argued that the value of being able to visit multiple sites could outweigh the value of continually visiting a single site. Risk Mitigation is a major concern for initial human missions to Mars. There are a number of hazards related to operating on the Martian surface that are not well characterized. It may be desirable to conduct a series of short duration missions to better understand the nature of these risks prior to committing to a long duration mission. Developmental Affordability relates to the ability of NASA and its partners to develop and deploy the proposed architecture. Any human missions to Mars will be among the most complex endeavors ever undertaken. The capabilities that must be developed to enable any human Mars missions are extremely challenging. The total design, development, test, and evaluation (DDT&E) budget required to develop just the essential capabilities alone will be substantial. If additional surface capabilities are required to support long duration surface stays, the development effort could be unaffordable. Operational Affordability & Flexibility relates to the continued costs to execute the Mars campaign. Long duration missions, even with some amount of in-situ resource utilization, require a significant level of resupply for every mission. This requires additional launches and in-space transportation assets, increasing the operational complexity and total operational cost. This paper will explore each of the four potential advantages of short duration missions in detail. The authors will present comparisons between proposed long duration and short duration architectures through an evaluation of relevant performance, cost, and risk metrics

Launch and Assembly Reliability Analysis for Mars Human Space Exploration Missions

NASA s long-range goal is focused upon human exploration of Mars. Missions to Mars will require campaigns of multiple launches to assemble Mars Transfer Vehicles in Earth orbit. Launch campaigns are subject to delays, launch vehicles can fail to place their payloads into the required orbit, and spacecraft may fail during the assembly process or while loitering prior to the Trans-Mars Injection (TMI) burn. Additionally, missions to Mars have constrained departure windows lasting approximately sixty days that repeat approximately every two years. Ensuring high reliability of launching and assembling all required elements in time to support the TMI window will be a key enabler to mission success. This paper describes an integrated methodology for analyzing and improving the reliability of the launch and assembly campaign phase. A discrete event simulation involves several pertinent risk factors including, but not limited to: manufacturing completion; transportation; ground processing; launch countdown; ascent; rendezvous and docking, assembly, and orbital operations leading up to TMI. The model accommodates varying numbers of launches, including the potential for spare launches. Having a spare launch capability provides significant improvement to mission success

Supportability for Beyond Low Earth Orbit Missions

Exploration beyond Low Earth Orbit (LEO) presents many unique challenges that will require changes from current Supportability approaches. Currently, the International Space Station (ISS) is supported and maintained through a series of preplanned resupply flights, on which spare parts, including some large, heavy Orbital Replacement Units (ORUs), are delivered to the ISS. The Space Shuttle system provided for a robust capability to return failed components to Earth for detailed examination and potential repair. Additionally, as components fail and spares are not already on-orbit, there is flexibility in the transportation system to deliver those required replacement parts to ISS on a near term basis. A similar concept of operation will not be feasible for beyond LEO exploration. The mass and volume constraints of the transportation system and long envisioned mission durations could make it difficult to manifest necessary spares. The supply of on-demand spare parts for missions beyond LEO will be very limited or even non-existent. In addition, the remote nature of the mission, the design of the spacecraft, and the limitations on crew capabilities will all make it more difficult to maintain the spacecraft. Alternate concepts of operation must be explored in which required spare parts, materials, and tools are made available to make repairs; the locations of the failures are accessible; and the information needed to conduct repairs is available to the crew. In this paper, ISS heritage information is presented along with a summary of the challenges of beyond LEO missions. A number of Supportability issues are discussed in relation to human exploration beyond LEO. In addition, the impacts of various Supportability strategies will be discussed. Any measure that can be incorporated to reduce risk and improve mission success should be evaluated to understand the advantages and disadvantages of implementing those measures. Finally, an effort to model and evaluate Supportability for beyond LEO missions will be described

Cis-Lunar Base Camp

Historically, when mounting expeditions into uncharted territories, explorers have established strategically positioned base camps to pre-position required equipment and consumables. These base camps are secure, safe positions from which expeditions can depart when conditions are favorable, at which technology and operations can be tested and validated, and facilitate timely access to more robust facilities in the event of an emergency. For human exploration missions into deep space, cis-lunar space is well suited to serve as such a base camp. The outer regions of cis-lunar space, such as the Earth-Moon Lagrange points, lie near the edge of Earth s gravity well, allowing equipment and consumables to be aggregated with easy access to deep space and to the lunar surface, as well as more distant destinations, such as near-Earth Asteroids (NEAs) and Mars and its moons. Several approaches to utilizing a cis-lunar base camp for sustainable human exploration, as well as some possible future applications are identified. The primary objective of the analysis presented in this paper is to identify options, show the macro trends, and provide information that can be used as a basis for more detailed mission development. Compared within are the high-level performance and cost of 15 preliminary cis-lunar exploration campaigns that establish the capability to conduct crewed missions of up to one year in duration, and then aggregate mass in cis-lunar space to facilitate an expedition from Cis-Lunar Base Camp. Launch vehicles, chemical propulsion stages, and electric propulsion stages are discussed and parametric sizing values are used to create architectures of in-space transportation elements that extend the existing in-space supply chain to cis-lunar space. The transportation options to cis-lunar space assessed vary in efficiency by almost 50%; from 0.16 to 0.68 kg of cargo in cis-lunar space for every kilogram of mass in Low Earth Orbit (LEO). For the 15 cases, 5-year campaign costs vary by only 15% from 0.36 to 0.51 on a normalized scale across all campaigns. Thus the development and first flight costs of assessed transportation options are similar. However, the cost of those options per flight beyond the initial operational capability varies by 70% from 0.3 to 1.0 on a normalized scale. The 10-year campaigns assessed begin to show the effect of this large range of cost beyond initial operational capability as they vary approximately 25% with values from 0.75 to 1.0 on the normalized campaign scale. Therefore, it is important to understand both the cost of implementation and first use as well as long term utilization. Finally, minimizing long term recurring costs is critical to the affordability of future human space exploration missions. Finally minimizing long term recurring costs is critical to the affordability of future human space exploration missions

Vehicle Design Data Format and Process for a Complete TARIS and OLTARIS Radiation Analysis for Designers and Engineers

Protecting astronauts from space radiation is a complex task when it comes to modeling and simulation. This document shows what information is needed from a spacecraft designer using CAD (Computer-Assisted Design) at each phase of the design to enable the engineers to evaluate the design phase against space radiation limits to determine the suitability of the design for space flight. The current personal exposure limits are listed in NASA STD-3001. A proxy to determine the REID (Radiation Exposure Induced Death) in NASA STD-3001 is the whole body effective dose equivalent (E or effective dose). For short-term tissue effects, organ-averaged gray equivalent (G (sub T)) is used. The TARIS (Tool for the Assessment of Radiation In Space - for LaRC (Langley Research Center) engineers) and OLTARIS (On-Line TARIS) - for designers) systems are used to generate these response functions. The E can use ICRP60 or NASA Q-values. A possible space radiation design basis environment for short-term tissue effects is described and used in all analyses. A single space vehicle was designed with three astronaut configurations and two of those configurations were used in a storm shelter thickness perturbation analysis. Conversion of the data from the CAD model to input necessary for TARIS and OLTARIS is also discussed in detail with relevant examples