Several new programs, efforts in space research and technology, are introduced that the Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology has begun to support. The four key issues that currently are consuming NASA's energies and should be of great concern are listed. NASA is placing its emphasis in space on: (1) reconstituting the Shuttle capability; (2) maintaining the space station momentum; (3) resolving the current science mission backlog; and (4) rebuilding the technology base. Ways of implementing and funding these issues are discussed

Romero, J.

English

NASA Technical Reports Server

5/87-2OO61
NASA OAST AND ITS ROLE IN SPACE TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT
by
J. Romero
Assistant Director for Space
Space Station Technology (Code R)
Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology
NASA Headquarters
INTRODUCTION
I would like to welcome the participants to the "Space Technology Plasma Issues in 2001"
conference here at JPL. I understand that you are all experts in this field and have contributed
many years of effort to the subject of space plasmas. It is therefore with real excitement and
pleasure that I open this conference and look forward to your ideas on how we should carry out in-
space plasma experiments. In my remarks today, I would like to introduce you to several new
programs, of which this conference is an integral part, that OAST has begun to support your
efforts in space research and technology. First, however, I want to briefly discuss the four key
issues that currently are consuming NASA's energies and should be of great concern to you, the
participants in this conference. NASA is placing its emphasis in space on:
1. reconstituting the Shuttle capability
2. maintaining the Space Station momentum
3. resolving the current science mission backlog
4. rebuilding the technology base
First, of course, NASA is seeking to reconstitute the Shuttle launch capability. It is
Dr. Fletcher's number one priority. The second one is maintaining the program momentum for
the Space Station. All of us are concerned about what is happening with the Space Station
program that the President has directed: When is it going to get started? Is it in trouble? Is there
sufficient money for it? I would like to state here that I think that the problems raised by Congress
with the Space Station are being disposed of nicely and that we will see a very strong program start
this coming year. Thirdly, there is the tremendous impact to the science missions and payloads
that the Shuttle problem has given rise to. NASA Headquarters is trying to determine how to work
around the delays, how to reschedule the missions, and how to protect the payloads that have
already been built and are sitting in storage.
Before turning to the fourth issue, that of rebuilding the technology base and the technology
capability of the agency, I would like to speak briefly about the Office of Aeronautics and Space
Technology (OAST). OAST has the responsibility for developing the advanced space technologies
that will enable or enhance future national missions. We are working towards developing a space
infrastructure, the cornerstone of which is the Space Station. Much of the technology activity in
OAST and much of the funds are going towards technologies that would support this
infrastructure. By infrastructure, I mean systems ranging from launch vehicles, propulsion
29
PRECEDING F ,_,GE E,LArqK NOT FILMED
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19870010628 2020-03-20T11:10:55+00:00Z
,t.
systems, and structures for launch vehicles to advanced systems such as large, space-station types
of structures, planetary missions, geoplatforms, lunar bases, and, in the distant future, long-
duration manned missions to Mars.
As a planning guide, we in OAST use a mission chart that identifies driver missions (Figure
1). In developing this chart, driver missions are f'n'st identified. These are coordinated with as
many people as possible to insure that our perspective of the future and the time frame are
reasonable. Once everyone agrees that these missions are probably what will be happening 10, 15,
or 20 years in the future, we can with some confidence begin to invest money in key technologies--
money that is currently very scarce. The mission drivers are used to guide, to provide scope, and
to give direction to OAST's research and technology activities. As shown in Figure 1,
technologies that will enable the next-generation space-transportation systems are being worked
on. Likewise, both next-generation spacecraft and large spacecraft systems technologies are being
studied. These three categories are being used to provide a vertical cut to our program structure.
Now I would like to relate a sad story. Many of you here were doing space research in the
1960's. As shown in Figure 2, the funding in space research and technology in constant year
dollars was well in excess of $900,000,000 a year from 1965 to 1967. That amount has eroded to
a very flat level of about $200,000,000 a year--actually less--at present. The level has been about
$175,000,000 a year for the last, almost 10 years. That investment has had to support the Space
Transportation System (Shuttle) Program, the Space Station Program, and all the other activities
that we're trying to do. That $200,000,000 doesn't really spread out very deeply. As
demonstrated by the profile in Figure 2, the country is really suffering with respect to the amount
of money going into research and technology for the space program.
Newspaper articles, the reports of blue-ribbon panels appointed by the President, and many
other sources have all indicated that the country's space technology base is really deficient. NASA
is living off the investments of the 1960's. The investment in advancing the state of technology to
any great level has not been replenished. Technology no longer leads with solutions, it chases
problems. Our expectations exceed what current technology can deliver. If the profile shown in
Figure 2 is extrapolated to industry, it is not hard to understand why people are saying that the
U.S. leadership in space is being challenged. NASA indeed recognized that its own expertise is on
the decline--we are losing people and it is becoming more and more difficult to attract bright young
graduates from the universities. We have a serious problem!
On that note I now want to introduce a new initiative that OAST has taken to the NASA
Administrator. It is called the Civil Space Technology Initiative or CSTI--like SDI! It is OAST's
response to the Administrator for a major augmentation within NASA for research and technology
dollars. The actual dollar amounts are currently being reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget and will be released in the next six months. We are optimistic that the initiative will be
successful and that it will provide the mechanism to reinvigorate the activities in research and
technology for space. We intend to develop a focused thrust to remedy gaps in the technology
base in order to enable high-priority programs. We plan to enable low-cost access to space and
key NASA missions through developments in:
launch-vehicle propulsion
booster technology
space-based propulsion
launch-system autonomy
3o
aembrakingtechnology
highcapacitypower
spacecraftpower
automationandrobotics
largestructuresandcontrol
sensordevicetechnology
highdata-ratesystems
Ultimately thesearethemeansto anend. This canbesummarizedin termsof theCSTI logic:
restoreagencytechnicalstrength;developfocusedtechnologydemonstrations;meetpriority needs
of NASA andNationalSecurity;rebuildtheimage,morale,andskillsof thecommunity;andmake
theprogramaffordable.This lastpoint,affordability,isvery importantand,asI will show,canbe
achieved.As illustratedby theNationalCommissiononSpaceandits mandateto thenationand
NASA to triple theinvestmentin researchandtechnology,manyothergroupshavetakenstands
similar to ours.
As to affordability,OASTbelievesthatthecountry can in fact invest very heavily in research
and technology without having to make any commitments at this time to a major new program.
This is an important point, since if each new program costs a billion dollars and there are 5 or 6
programs, then there is a 5- or 6-billion dollar a year commitment required. In contrast, the
investment in research and technology can be on the order of 2- to 3-hundred-million dollars a year
added to what we are currently spending. That is a very affordable investment without the
necessity of commiting to the big, expensive programs of the past. It will permit us to make those
kinds of big decisions farther in the future when the technology risk is much lower. This
investment strategy will make this option viable. I think it is going to be a very exciting time for
NASA beginning in FY88 with this infusion of money for research and technology.
The initial focus of the CSTI program will be in six areas:
1. Propulsion 4.
- Earth-to-orbit
- Orbit transfer
- Booster technology
. Vehicle
- Aeroassist flight experiment
.
Large structure and control
- Control of flexible structures
- Precision segmented reflectors
Power
- High capacity
- Spacecraft
3. Information systems 6.
- Science sensor technology
- Data: High rate/capacity
Automation and robotics
- Robotics
- Autonomous systems
There are several areas in this list that are applicable to plasma interactions and, when we get
approval, I am sure that the members of this group will be important participants in it.
I would now like to return to the subject of the conference--plasma interactions and in-space
experiments. NASA has been conducting in-space experiments since 1960. Starting with 1960,
we can construct an interesting profile of the type of experiments that have gone into orbit. In the
earliest days, the experiments were basically associated with the programs and supported them--for
example, the Gemini and Apollo programs. Since that time there has been a dip. More recently,
31
with the Shuttle, there has been a tremendous resurgence of activity. The Shuttle is a facility that
lends itself very nicely to doing things in space and in-space experimentation has grown
accordingly. Now NASA is in a temporary stand-down. Even so, with the experience gathered
since 1960 and on the Shuttle, we feel that we have demonstrated the feasibility of doing in-space
experimentation on a routine basis. For the first time, the space environment has become an
extension of ground-based activities. Now when it's necessary to go into space to do something,
it is feasible, it is affordable, and it is becoming a significant new area for future opportunities.
As an example of in-space experiments applicable to future programs, consider the
construction by astronauts of a truss assembly in the Shuttle bay in December of 1985. The truss
is a baseline concept for the Space Station. It was this in-space experiment that was the final proof
of the concept. Even more exciting experiments are planned in this area over the next 3 to 5 years--
one is the further study of the control of large flexible structures in space. There are, in fact, three
succeeding experiments, each becoming more and more complex. They start with a single beam
and move on to two-body and then multi-body configurations. Similarly, OAST plans an
aeroassist experiment for the Orbiter. A re-entry shield will be flown in and out of the Earth's
upper atmosphere to evaluate maneuvering and aerobreaking concepts similar to those planned for
future planetary missions.
The Space Station is being designed to be a facility. It will be a facility in the sense that it is
intended to be actively used for research. That is, it is intended to satisfy the needs of the science
community, and the technology community and to take advantage of commercial opportunities.
The Space Station will act as a cornerstone, as a node, in the infrastructure of our space system. It
will help us to get to the outer planets, perhaps establish a base on the moon, and will be a facility
for performing numerous in-space operational activities.
Today we are at a crossroads. We have demonstrated the feasibility of doing things in space.
There is an emerging, vocal user's community made up of many different interest groups and
organizations. In turn, user needs are being reflected in the design of future space facilities which
are being developed as national resources. They present unique opportunities to do things in space
and answer many critical questions. In particular we find an exponentially expanding program
driven by the convergence of:
USER NEEDS: SPACE FACILITIES:
• Research in:
- Materials
- Huids
- Devices
- Structures, Controls
• Demonstration
- Proof of concept
- Engineering demonstration
- Flight qualification
• Shuttle
- Payload Bay
- Mid-deck
- Cannisters
- Hitchhikers
• Space Station
- Internal payloads
- ExternaUy mounted
- Technology Laboratory Module
- Platform based
These two efforts--user needs and space facilities--are coming together in a coherent program.
32
Forthe lastyearI havetrying to buildaprogramfor in-spaceexperimentationwithin OAST
thatwill beacceptedasareal,viableelementof thespaceprogram.Thereis nodoubtthatasnew
technologiesaregoing to beneededasthespaceinfrastructuregrows,oneof the bestwaysto
advancetechnologyandtransferthattechnologyto applicationsis to eitherconducttheexperiment
in spaceand/orhavea demonstrationin space.This allows theuserto gainconfidencethatthe
technologydoesin fact work andthat hecanbaselinehis spacesystemdesign. As partof the
planningfor thiseffort, wehavedevelopedseventhemeareas:energysystems,spacestructures,
automationandrobotics,fluid management,informationsystems,in-spaceoperations,and,the
subjectof thisconference,spaceenvironmentaleffects.
To beginthestudy,amajorworkshopwascarriedout in Williamsburg,Virginia in October,
1985. Eachof thesethemeareaswasaddressedin detail by the400 attendees.The attendees
representeda cross-sectionof civil service,industry,university,andDoD spaceworkers. The
majorconclusionof theconferencewasthattherearesignificantdesiresto doexperimentsin space
that advancethe sevenresearchand technologyareasjust listed. The seventhemeswere
determinedto bevalid planningmechanisms.This yearwe aresponsoringmini-workshopsor
symposiumsin manyof thethethemeareas.Fluids,largestructures,materials,and,here,plasma
interactionsarecurrentlybeingreviewed. Thusmanyactivitiesorchestratedundera common
program umbrella are starting to happen. We can aggregateall theseand build a casefor
developinganin-spaceexperimentprogram.ThusweareestablishingOASTasthenationalfocal
pointfor in-spaceresearchandtechnology.Wearecoordinatingtheusercommunityrequirements
andplansthroughworkshopsandsymposia.
Wehavebuilt a lot of interestoverthelastyearin thisprogram. Oneof thepitfalls wehave
encountered,however,is thatwemaybebuildinginteresttoo fastandwith it, falseexpectations.
Certainly,with theShuttleproblemandnotknowinghowmuchcapacitywill beavailableoverthe
next 5 years in termsof Shuttlemanifesting,it is very easy to becometrapped. We have,
however, takenpositive stepsto stimulatecooperativeventuresthrough a new program--the
OutreachProgram. In October1985,at theWilliamsburg Conference,Dr. Ray Colladay,my
boss,statedto theconfereesatthemeeting:
"I'm willing to put upmoney. I'm willing to challengeyou...I want to challengeyou, and
I'm willing to put up$10million a yearof my money,andI wantyou to matchit. I want you to
notnecessarilymatchthemoney,butmatchresources.I wantyou to comebackto meandtellme
what you want to do in spaceand I will makemy moneyandmy resourcesavailableto you.
Togetherwecanfly thetypeof experimentsthatyou in industryor theacademicommunitywant
to do in space."
Theintentof Dr. Colladay'sremarksis to buildadvocacyfor in-spaceexperimentsandbuild
a programthat would leadto maximumutilization of the SpaceStationwhenit becomesan
operationalentity. As a fu'ststepin theIndustry/UniversityExperimentsProgramor "Outreach"
(asseparatefrom theCSTI),a CBDannouncementwasreleasedon June30, 1986andanRFP
wasreleasedon August 15, 1986. Theobjectiveis to provide incentivesto industry to better
utilizethetechnologydevelopmentpotentialof space.Theapproachis to: 1)selectexperimentsof
mutual benefit to industry and NASA; 2) jointly develop,program, and fund appropriate
experiments;and3) provideuniquefacilities(Shuttleor SpaceStation). Therearetwo classesof
ventures:thosefor which the concepthasbeendevelopedand,perhaps,for which hardwareis
readyto go. In thiscase,OASTwill providefundsfor integrationandafreeflight. In thesecond
case,theconceptmaybeexcellent,but it mayhavenot beendevelopedvery far. In that case,
33
OASTwill providemoney,perhaps$100-$200thousandperconceptto allow furtherdefinition.
In 1to 2 yearstheconceptwill berecompetedto seeif it shouldbetakento thehardwarestage.
In termsof funding, in FY86, OAST has committed only about $32 million a year to flight
experiments. It is currently projected that when the Space Station becomes operational, that
$30 million will grow to $100 million. It may in fact grow to more but the baseline for my
program is currently $100 million. This growth curve is shown in Figure 3 for the Outreach
Program. With the combined efforts of universities and industries to match this level, the program
should easily become a $200-million-a-year program by 1995. The potential for growth is even
higher if the military in-space program is included. The nation could easily have a substantial half-
billion dollar a year program in in-space technology. With this level of funding, there will be many
opportunities to address such areas as plasma interactions. The potential is there!
This conference will be important in influencing our choices in this program. When we
begin talking about Space-Station size facilities such as large deployable reflectors or even the
Space Station itself, plasma interactions will play a key role in their performance. We have, for
example, no real understanding of what effects plasma interactions will have on even such basic
issues as contamination or safety. These issues will have to be addressed. The opportunity is here
because NASA is going to have a Space Station and things have reached the point where such
issues need to be addressed. There is no better group than those of you here today to identify the
key plasma issues and to lay out a program that says "these issues have to be addressed over the
next 10 years and these are the experiments that will answer those questions." The product of this
conference is intended to support an investment of real dollars in a program in plasma interactions.
The program may not be the size that you ask for but it will be the beginning of what we hope will
be a long-term effort to answer at least some of the key questions in plasma interactions!
34
!i ++.
I 0E +
z"\_<__].,>.,_ • a'-' oi \2..--
0 • _>-U
w z >' _, -" ,.u
_. _ w g _.;r _'+i+,--" :.-u _ I: -
_ " ' .J -r+._" ",.,, < _ "4 )- ----"='---- :E
m h+ ,. 0 m
_._> _ _ _ o .- z
O. _[ 0 ",. "_'%
o
ZZ _'_-- _' -'
ZZ
<" El =o
-.- +<_' +o ._ +,-"e,-._6 |
W) PI -:,."0"+ :+,,, ,+,:t,
ii+
WZ + ,:it
P-,,P""'(I+;'_ - _u_ __
Z
0
n
<
I-
r_
0
O.
U)
Z
<
i,r.
I--
<
U
IJJ
U
<
l.l
(n
(n
..J u) >-(n
+-
o
>
.,--i
35
AIll*
uJ_
.J
ILlU.
! ! ! !
O
O)
o)
tO
CO
O)
O
co
r,-
O)
O
O)
Lt)
(D
tm
O
>-
O
O
O
r-
36
c_
°_
37


NASA OAST and its role in space technology development

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

NASA Technical Reports Server