Orion Launch Abort System Performance During Exploration Flight Test 1

The Orion Launch Abort System Office is taking part in flight testing to enable certification that the system is capable of delivering the astronauts aboard the Orion Crew Module to a safe environment during both nominal and abort conditions. Orion is a NASA program, Exploration Flight Test 1 is managed and led by the Orion prime contractor, Lockheed Martin, and launched on a United Launch Alliance Delta IV Heavy rocket. Although the Launch Abort System Office has tested the critical systems to the Launch Abort System jettison event on the ground, the launch environment cannot be replicated completely on Earth. During Exploration Flight Test 1, the Launch Abort System was to verify the function of the jettison motor to separate the Launch Abort System from the crew module so it can continue on with the mission. Exploration Flight Test 1 was successfully flown on December 5, 2014 from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station's Space Launch Complex 37. This was the first flight test of the Launch Abort System preforming Orion nominal flight mission critical objectives. The abort motor and attitude control motors were inert for Exploration Flight Test 1, since the mission did not require abort capabilities. Exploration Flight Test 1 provides critical data that enable engineering to improve Orion's design and reduce risk for the astronauts it will protect as NASA continues to move forward on its human journey to Mars. The Exploration Flight Test 1 separation event occurred at six minutes and twenty seconds after liftoff. The separation of the Launch Abort System jettison occurs once Orion is safely through the most dynamic portion of the launch. This paper will present a brief overview of the objectives of the Launch Abort System during a nominal Orion flight. Secondly, the paper will present the performance of the Launch Abort System at it fulfilled those objectives. The lessons learned from Exploration Flight Test 1 and the other Flight Test Vehicles will certainly contribute to the vehicle architecture of a human-rated space launch vehicle

Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) Solid Motor Technology Plans

Recent trades have taken place on solid propulsion options to support a potential Mars Sample Retrieval Campaign. Mass and dimensional requirements for a Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) are being assessed. One MAV vehicle concept would utilize a solid propulsion system. Key challenges to designing a solid propulsion system for MAV include low temperatures beyond common tactical and space requirements, performance, planetary protection, mass limits, and thrust vector control system. Two solutions are addressed, a modified commercial commercially available system, and an optimum new concept

Development Concepts for Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) Solid and Hybrid Vehicle Systems

The Advanced Concepts Office (ACO) at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) has conducted ongoing studies and trades into options for both hybrid and solid vehicle systems for potential Mars Ascent Vehicle (MAV) concepts for the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). Two MAV propulsion options are being studied for use in a potential Mars Sample Retrieval (MSR) campaign. The following paper describes the current concepts for hybrid and solid propulsion vehicles for MAV as part of a potential MSR campaign, and provides an overview of the ongoing studies and trades for both hybrid and solid vehicle system concepts. Concepts and options under consideration for vehicle subsystems include reaction control system (RCS), separation, and structures will be described in terms of technology readiness level (TRL), benefit to the vehicle design, and associated risk. A hybrid propulsion system, which uses a solid fuel core and liquid oxidizer, is currently being developed by JPL with support from MSFC. This type of hybrid propulsion vehicle would allow the MAV to be more flexible at the cost of higher complexity, in contrast to the solid propulsion vehicle that is simpler, but allows less flexibility. The solid propulsion vehicle study performed by MSFC in 2018 further refined the solid propulsion system sizing as well as added definition to vehicle subsystem concepts, including the RCS, structures and configuration, interstage and separation, aerodynamics, and power/avionics. The studies were performed using an iterative concept design methodology, engaging subject matter experts from across MSFCs propulsion and vehicle systems disciplines as well as seeking trajectory feedback from analysts at JPL

Executive Summary of Propulsion on the Orion Abort Flight-Test Vehicles

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration Orion Flight Test Office was tasked with conducting a series of flight tests in several launch abort scenarios to certify that the Orion Launch Abort System is capable of delivering astronauts aboard the Orion Crew Module to a safe environment, away from a failed booster. The first of this series was the Orion Pad Abort 1 Flight-Test Vehicle, which was successfully flown on May 6, 2010 at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico. This report provides a brief overview of the three propulsive subsystems used on the Pad Abort 1 Flight-Test Vehicle. An overview of the propulsive systems originally planned for future flight-test vehicles is also provided, which also includes the cold gas Reaction Control System within the Crew Module, and the Peacekeeper first stage rocket motor encased within the Abort Test Booster aeroshell. Although the Constellation program has been cancelled and the operational role of the Orion spacecraft has significantly evolved, lessons learned from Pad Abort 1 and the other flight-test vehicles could certainly contribute to the vehicle architecture of many future human-rated space launch vehicle

Mars Ascent Vehicle Propulsion System Solid Motor Technology Plans

Mars Ascent Vehicle Study Summary: Potential Mars Sample Return Campaign; Assumptions; Motor Sizing; Propellant Selection; Nozzle and Controls; Development and Qualification Testing; Future Work

Lawmakers\u27 Use of Scientific Evidence Can Be Improved

Core to the goal of scientific exploration is the opportunity to guide future decision-making. Yet, elected officials often miss opportunities to use science in their policymaking. This work reports on an experiment with the US Congress-evaluating the effects of a randomized, dual-population (i.e., researchers and congressional offices) outreach model for supporting legislative use of research evidence regarding child and family policy issues. In this experiment, we found that congressional offices randomized to the intervention reported greater value of research for understanding issues than the control group following implementation. More research use was also observed in legislation introduced by the intervention group. Further, we found that researchers randomized to the intervention advanced their own policy knowledge and engagement as well as reported benefits for their research following implementation

Development, implementation, and scalability of the Family Engagement in Research Course: a novel online course for family partners and researchers in neurodevelopmental disability and child health

Background: Since 2011 when the Canadian Institutes of Health Research launched the Strategy for Patient Oriented Research, there has been a growing expectation to embed patient-oriented research (POR) in the health research community in Canada. To meet this expectation and build capacity for POR in the field of neurodevelopmental disability and child health, in 2017 researchers and family leaders at CanChild Centre for Childhood Disability Research, McMaster University partnered with Kids Brain Health Network and McMaster Continuing Education to develop and implement a 10-week online Family Engagement in Research (FER) Course. Main text: From its inception, the FER Course has been delivered in partnership with family leaders and researchers. The FER Course is innovative in its co-learning and community building approach. The course is designed to bring family partners and researchers together to co-learn and connect, and to develop competency and confidence in both the theory and practice of family engagement in research. Coursework involves four live online group discussions, individual review of course materials, weekly group activities, and a final group project and presentation. Upon completion of the FER Course, graduates earn a McMaster University micro-credential. Conclusions: To meet a need in building capacity in POR, a novel course in the field of neurodevelopmental disability and child health has been co-created and delivered. Over six years (2018–2023), the FER Course has trained more than 430 researchers and family partners across 20 countries. A unique outcome of the FER Course is that graduates expressed the wish to stay connected and continue to collaborate well beyond the course in turn creating an international FER Community Network that continues to evolve based on need. The FER Course is creating a growing international community of researchers, trainees, self-advocates, and family partners who are championing the implementation of meaningful engagement in neurodevelopmental disability and child health research and beyond. The course is internationally recognized with an established record of building capacity in POR. Its uptake, sustainability, and scalability to date has illustrated that training programs like the FER Course are necessary for building capacity and leadership in family engagement in research

Building a culture of engagement at a research centre for childhood disability

BACKGROUND: Engaging patients and family members as partners in research studies has become a widespread practice in healthcare. However, relatively little has been documented about what happens after the research study ends. For example, is patient and family engagement embedded in the wider infrastructure of organizations, and if so how? What are the long-term effects of engaging parents on research teams on the culture of how research is conducted? This study seeks to address these two gaps by examining how a culture of family engagement has been built over time at CanChild Centre for Childhood Disability Research at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada. METHODS: This study is based on ethnographic research methodology and combines elements of organizational ethnography, interviews, and collaborative auto-ethnography with parent partners, researchers, staff, and trainees. RESULTS: Since the inception of CanChild Centre for Childhood Disability Research at McMaster University in 1989, parents have been involved in research studies. Over time, this involvement evolved from being consulted on research studies to undertaking decision-making roles as partners and most recently as co-principal investigators. A growing infrastructure fosters a community of engagement that goes beyond the individual research study, and often beyond CanChild. This infrastructure consists of training, knowledge mobilization and social networking. In addition, the "softer" building blocks of CanChild's culture of engagement are an openness to learning from others, a commitment to relationship building, and a drive to grow and improve. These values are espoused by the leadership and are instilled in the next generation of researchers to inform both research and clinical work. While some challenges should be acknowledged when researchers and family partners work together on research studies, we identify a number of strategies that we have used in our studies to foster authentic and meaningful family-researcher partnerships. CONCLUSION: Engaging patients and families as partners in research constitutes a culture shift in health research, whereby studies about patients and families are carried out with them. Developing a community of engagement that transcends an individual research study is a step towards creating a culture of research that is truly shaped by the people about whom the research is being done